Thread: Who deserves a primary do-over?

Michigan or Florida? Maybe I missed the discussion, but what do you think? Do they deserve another shot? I don't know the whole story, but I think maybe Florida does, seeing a Republican state legislature made the changes. But Michigan, no way. The party was quite clear what the consequences would be but they did it anyway. Deal with it.

They agreed to abide by the rules and then broke that pledge and in my opinion that means no seated delegates.

In my way of thinking, it doesn't really matter if they do either or both over, it won't truly satisfy anyone regardless of what the media tells us. I say that because Hillary won them both fair and square the 1st time, if they do it over and if the results are different than the 1st time all the Hillary supporters will be pissed off and won't vote at all, or vote for McCain.

They should have come up with an acceptable solution way back that both could agree to then they wouldn't have the mess they have now.

Your question was, which one if not both deserves a re-do right ?

I say Michigan, because I understood that Obama's name was taken off the ballot so unless it was a write in next to no one voted for him but in Florida his name was on the ballot just the same as Hillary and neither did much campaigning there and Hillary won, I say leave it as it stands in Florida and count it as it stands but Re-Do Michigan, that seems reasonable to me.

The question now is, what if Hillary wins Pensylvania and she wins Florida by a similar margin, that puts the delagate count painfully close, it may then depend on Michigan or Florida depending on how they handle things, in either case that means neither will have anywhere near the 2,025 delegates he or she needs to win the nomination, what do they do about that and how then are they going to keep peace, the losing candidate's supporters may not accept the super delegates decision and either not vote or vote for McCain ?

You can fix disenfranchisement, but you cant fix stupid.