Reply #2: You know, up until today I would have agreed. But I didn't know [View All]

[RunningFromCongress]

that the gov. of FL and MI moved up the primary. I had thought it was the state dem party. Since both govs are Rep. then I totally disagree with the DNCs decision to strip them of their votes (unless they could have changed the date for dems., then fuck FL and MI).

However since it was done, and the DNC did tell the candidates not to campaign this is how I think it should go down:

either:

A) MI holds another primary/caucus and FL gets 1/2 their delegates seated and split according to the state vote.

B) Only FL is seated with 1/2 their delegates.

If you feel the DNC was unfair in stripping MI, then you should agree it would be equally unfair for DNC to allow delegates to only be seated for Hillary, therefore punishing Obama for complying with the DNC's (His/Her/OUR party)wishes and removing his name from the ballot. If MI doesn't deserve to be punished neither does Obama.

Since FL was uncontested I think it's fair that they only get 1/2 their delegates.