Reply #78: MY STATE 2:: ( **((((PART 2)))))** [View All]

[indimuse]

*2) Donna Brazile recently suggested that admitting FL and MI delegations was unfair to all other states, and would be a destructive precedent for future elections. The logic here is appallingly stupid. Is Brazile suggesting that nixing the vote of 2.4 million voters, is the only way we can keep our Primaries fair for 48 other states? Or is she seriously suggesting that accepting 2.4 million voters, will somehow disenfranchise 48 states? In either case, the stupidity is ghastly.
Numerically, FL and MI do not impact the 48 other states. Numerically they neither enfranchise or disenfranchise them. To bring 48 others states into the MI and FL argument, is plain insulting.

Politically, for both the Nation and the Democratic Party, 48 states lose only, if FL and MI lose. If FL and MI win, the 48 states gain. There is no scenario, in which a loss of MI and FL, is a win for 48 other states.

In plain English, depriving 2.4 million voters of their vote, is positive sum loss for the Party. Reinstating their vote, is a positive sum gain. Brazile’s argument, is a cheap ploy, which anyone sitting across the table from her, should be at liberty to call for what it is, an unfounded “Victim” card.

The same goes for precedents. Mrs Brazile would be well advised to consider her “precedents” wisely. (Never mind that she needs to be fired off CNN), what kind of precedents does disenfranchising 2.4 million voters send for future elections, compared to the precedent of counting FL and MI send?

The precedent at disenfranchisement needs no explanation. A careless party, which carelessly abandons its state parties, and which is vulnerable to partisan infighting, will not make it into the next election cycle. The hemorrhage will be awesome. Then there is the 48 state strategy- which is an outright insult not only to FL and MI, but to every state. Ban MI and FL, and you are telling every state that its vote is never guaranteed into the future.

The precedent set by counting both FL and ML delegates, is altogether positive. It sends the message that the DNC is aware of its faults and negligence which it intends to correct, and that our party is a democratic party not just in name. That it is competent enough to apply its rules correctly, and even failing to do so in a timely manner, finds ways to compensate.

Now Brazile will say, that counting FL and MI sends the message to future DNC election rule violators, that the rules can be broken with impunity. She wont be troubled with the obverse question; whether the rules can be applied, without cause, shame, impunity, and in a haphazard - hence discriminatory - manner. No, counting FL and MI will not tell future violators, that the rules don’t matter. The opposite will be told, that no matter how biased the media, and partisan the party, the rules will be applied fairly, without discrimination, and at the appropriate time.

Donna Brazile should pause, before talking of any precedents. Her logic, is self-incriminatory.