On Feb 13, 2008, at 8:06 PM, Leland F. Jackson, CPA wrote:

> Still, the Democratic primary voters for these two state have been
> disenfranchised, regardless of how you justify it.


        Not really. They elected their party leaders, and their party leaders  
acted irresponsibly. My guess is that none of those leaders will  
retain their posts for long. *That's* how democracy is supposed to work.

> Your a programmer, so you know the benefits of standardization.  There
> is no reason why parties can't agree to standardize primaries to be  
> less
> confusing and more efficient.

        I also know the benefit of agile development. Rigor only takes you so  
far, so I don't think that's a very good analogy.

> Well, the way it works today is designed to eliminate candidate in a
> hurry and settle on a front runner within the first few primaries.

        It's supposed to winnow out the untenable candidates early, leaving a  
more manageable field for the majority of states to select from.

> I wonder if the Hillary Clinton campaign had anything to do moving the
> Michigan and Florida primary earlier in the voting.  Hillary would  
> have
> easily won both of these state, possibility sucking all the air out of
> the Obama challenge and eliminating him early.  Such is life.

        Wow, more Hillary conspriracy theories. She certainly seems to  
inspire them, even among her supporters!

        What's more likely is that those states wanted a bigger share of the $ 
$ spent in primaries. The amount of money spent in NH and Iowa is  
staggering compared to those states' populations.

-- Ed Leafe





_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to