Should we, could we, sue?

[fadedrose]

According to Dictionary.com, here's a relevant word and meaning:

mal·prac·tice
/
–noun 1. Law. failure of a professional person, as a physician or lawyer, to render proper services through reprehensible ignorance or negligence or through criminal intent, esp. when injury or loss follows.
2. any improper, negligent practice; misconduct or misuse

Seems to me that professional politicians should at least be able to put together a primary that is legitimate and has the names of ALL the candidates. In Michigan's case, the reason for moving the primary up was because MI's was so late that the candidates we liked had already dropped out because of low showings in other states. So we had ours Jan. 15 and we should have had all of the names that appeared on Iowa and NH's ballots.

What we got had to be the result of one or more of the descriptions of malpractice. Politicians are no more special than doctors and should take their bumps when they deserve it. At least a dozen elected Dems in MI should be the defendant in a CLASS-ACTION SUIT brought by the people for denying them the opportunity to vote their choice and have it count.

Same goes for those states like Ohio and Texas where people left before their vote was recorded because of crowds and lack of ballots. Somebody is responsible and it has to be the people who plan these fiascoes.

I heard HC might sue in some states - so should the people sue where they have been robbed of their votes with no wrongdoing on their part.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. Yes

you should sue Obama for taking his name off the ballot if you feel that strongly about it.

[shadowknows69]

2. Huh?

[fadedrose]

3. The officials had the responsibility for the content of the ballot,

those unlisted candidates wanted no part of an unsanctioned election.

Who approved the ballot that robbed us or tried to force us into voting for someone we didn't want? Sure wasn't Obama or Edwards.

Use your head.

[MonkeyFunk]

4. Obama took his name off the ballot

the state isn't obligated to put it back on. Your complaint is stupid.

[Spider Jerusalem]

5. And Michigan broke DNC rules, therefire the DNC isn't obligated to respect the results there

any argument to the contrary is stupid (and there's going to be a new primary there anyway, it looks like, so any further insistence on seating the delegation as is is pointless).

[MonkeyFunk]

6. I've never argued that they had a legal obligation to do so

But not doing so would be so politically stupid, it would go down in the annals of history as the biggest political blunder in American history.

This will be resolved. Leaving the situation as is is not an option.

[fadedrose]

7. Redoing is what we want in MI - but who pays??

I think the people responsible should pay. They ought to have known better. It's a matter of being ignorant or unethical - these are longtime, experienced, professional, elected Democrats. There is no excuse.

[MonkeyFunk]

8. The DNC

gambled that FL and MI delegates wouldn't matter in determining the nominee. It was probably a reasonable gamble at the time - few could foresee the closeness of this race.

But now it matters, and they have to resolve it - and the sooner the better.

[cali]

9. LOL!!! What hyperbole.

It would hardly go down as one of the biggest political blunders in American history. And it will be worked out. MI is already on the way to being resolved, and I'm sure FL will be too. People should stop getting their panties in a twist over this.

[fadedrose]

10. My point

My panties aren't in a twist about the redo. I'm sick of Howard Dean being blamed for this mess in MI. I want the people who work for our Governor, Senators, etc., who read and participate in DU to know that blaming Dean isn't going to be that easy.

And I'm sure that's what they plan to do.

It's my teeny way of going on the offense so we don't need to go on defense as much. I'd like to see them a bit nervous and more anxious to please the electorate instead of just blaming Dean.