It really doesn't matter, even though we'll have the primary in January, it will take at least three to four months to count the votes anyway. Florida isn't known for it's counting ability. Good thing I grew up in the New York school system before I moved here.

That's the problem Tom - they have former residents of the Northeast counting the ballots.

Straw polls are meaningless. Romney will be the state-wide winner from registered voters.

I wouldn't be to sure, theirs a big tea party down here that would vote for anybody but Romney in the GOP primary. That vote would lean more toward Perry.

Fiesty it's all about us conservatives, get with the program

Maybe Florida will first bring in katherine harris again to first eliminate another 60,000+ lower income voters and then obfuscate everything with dangling chads again? ... The media needs to be feed.

Yawn.

Straw polls are like straw man arguments, easy to knock down and making a misrepresentation.

All the primaries should be held the same date. This staggered voting is undemocratic.

All the primaries should be open, too. Any registered voter should be able to vote for any candidate, regardless of party.

All I can say is here we go again--the battle for who's on first starts again. The last time around, it looked like Iowans would be caucusing during the holidays.

flbikerchick, while I sort of agree, I also think open primaries open a can of worms with a lot of monkey business. There's enough shenanigans as it is.

Herman Cain. What a gem.

He wants Muslims to sign a "loyalty pledge" to the USA in order to work for the government.

This staggered voting is undemocratic.

We are not a democracy. This fact has saved us (for now) from mob-rule by the innumerable factions that exist in other countries. However, the more and more the federal gov't takes power away from the states, the more we start to look like everybody else.

I do agree with flbikerchick that primaries should be open. At least then, we might have the two best candidates rather than the two most extreme candidates against each other. But agh, Judy's right too...that might open up a lot of "monkey business".

I think they're all wasting their time. DOesnt matter which scrub they throw at the general election, they'll still lose, even despite Obama's less than stellar job. The GOP is a pariah these days, and the state of the economy is their fault.

Does anyone think it is funny how Feisty Redhead is always the first to post on the First Read articles? I smell a paid hack. It might be worth what they are paying if she/him/it actually had an objective well balance point of view that carefully considered both sides of the discussion before spewing some insane rhetoric.

Screw the comics....I read her/his/its posts for a good laugh as I stare into an insane person's mind. ROFL!!!

Feisty...

Please keep 'em coming. I assure you...no one enjoys your lunacy more than I do. :)

There is an interesting political interpretation of this move. What if the leadership in the FL legislature is fairly certain that the people of FL are going to vote predominantly for what they consider to be the wrong candidate (ie. teabaggers instead of mainline party candidates). This move would cut in half the influence of the voters in their state, perhaps allowing a more suitable candidate to win the nomination. Then, when the election comes around, those people sure as heck aren't going to vote for the Dem candidate, anyway. Just sayin'...

They could have move it to the heart of Hurricane season. I guess they didn't think about that!

maybe next time.

Bloggit...

I agree there is an agenda behind it. However, I don't think it has to do with the Tea Party factor. I believe the GOP wants to expedite the primary in an effort to mitigate any damage done by intra-party fighting.

The GOP wants to make sure they make him a one term POTUS. If they are continuously infighting, they may hurt their chances of making that happen. The longer the primary election goes on, the more divided they are internally. If the GOP wants to beat him, they need to unify their party. The primary doesn't lend itself to achieving that goal.

My $0.02...$0.01 after taxes...$0.005 after proposed dem taxes. :)

Being that Florida has a total Tea Party/Imposter/?/Corporate Thief Leader/Governor, it is very possible the less than respectable path is being taken by him in order to wait until the diminished effects of our Republican/TP Primary will be more effective in getting FL out of the way of the greater cause.

First Read is easily becoming where all the sad clown radicals of the Dimocrats and Douchebags come to try to get each other to fight with them. It'd be pathetic if it weren't a source of a lot of laughs.

I must say it is a source of amusement and somewhat sad to read just how bitter, jealous and resentful of another person's success some people can become in their life. The unfortunate part is that, that is why they gravitate toward socialism. They somehow believe they will be better off, which is not the case. The Democrats tell em what they want to hear. If the government keeps spending at the rate Obama and the Democrats want, we will face a real financial crisis and the cuts will be deep. The Democrats do a good job at exaggerations and misinformation. I sure hope enough voters figure it out before the next presidential election and we can reverse course and have fiscal responsibility in Washington which is needed in order to prevent us from becoming Greece. The small size and equally small minded group of extreme left believers that posts here will never deal with reality. Pathetic as it is, just have a good laugh.

Hello Tony,

What is it again, exactly, that the Republicans tell you guys which makes you seem so much more correct to yourself? What things that are true?!?! They spend like drunk sailors, yet your kind only claim the Dems do. The Dems DO continue to keep nearly all of the Republicans' spending and tax cuts in place.

Both Parties are at fault, but the Republicans are the Biggest Hypocrits in their lack of admission of doing every thing they can to erase the Middle Class, for starters.

The primaries are getting ridiculously far ahead of the general election. So much can change between the two that a person that seems like a good candidate during the primary can become a dud before the election. Also, the early primary states have far too much influence due to the huge spread in time between all the primaries. A poor showing in some small early states can knock a candidate out of the race even before the larger states with the higher electoral vote counts even have their say. This seems very undemocratic. The primaries need to be all around the same time so that all of the states have a real say in who the candidates are.

notso....You are correct! Both parties are at fault. But it is time to change and recognize the excess spending has to stop and reforms to major programs have to made now. What happened in the past and the who to blame conversation is a waste of time. That is where leadership comes into play. The difference that I see is that when a Republican proposes major reform the Democrats use it to score political points. Wealth redistribution and higher taxes are not the solution to improving the middle class or anyone else for that matter. The tax codes need to be reformed. Regardless of tax increases or decreases, we cannot continue to rack up trillion dollar deficits and add to a 14 trillion dollar debt and go on much longer. Obama continues to believe more government spending is a solution. Do we have to become Greece for people to get it!

Honestly folks not everyone can be first. It all about money. Candidates spend more and there are more of them in the early primaries. It should be done by lottery. With the RNC, DNC, and any other parties running it, drawing ships of paper out of a jar . If not soon the primaries will start the day after the election.

They trained over 1,750 persons in Florida how to count chad ballots. Al Gore said "now" they do it.

True. Throwing money at a problem without justification nor effective guarantee of return on that investment would be foolish to defend.

Besides the W Bush Adm having given away a huge chunk of cash for the unjustifiable wars, the stimulus they created and Obama continued with ended up being effective enough to have stopped us from going ALL the way over the cliff into depression, not that I belive the Bank Bailout was not an extreme example of our Government's Rulers. Obama backing Solyndra, not smart at all, just not as costly as W's giveaways. I am not even going to do more than mention the Iraq War costs which they hid from the budget deficit.

But I digress. Hopefully the United States of Corporatism will get its act together rather than continue down the road to ruin which we seemed locked on.

I just doubt it, as wresting control back from the Lobbyists entrenchment in Both Parties' decisions and tax code and law writing seems like just a dream. Would love to hear practical and possible ways to do this from anybody though!

Peace

This nonsense is exactly why ALL voters need to get involved in the Popular Amendment Movement to help pass the Election/Campaign Finance Reform constitutional amendment. Go to either www.faircampaignreform.us or http://wh.gov/4Qu to get involved. The latter is a posting of the petition on the We The People website. Help get 5000 signatures in the next 29 days and it goes to the President for review. Once on the site and you have registered to sign petitions, you can also post your own petition. There are over 80 petitions on the site already, with some already over the 5,000 signature threshold and on their way to the president for review.

You wanted to hear practical and possible ways to wrestling control back from the Lobbyists, then get involved notsojingo. This IS a way to wrestle that control back from the lobbyists, as the amendment BANS them from all contact with members of Congress. It also eliminates all corporate, union, non-profit, PAC, super-PAC, etc. campaign contributions to federal candidates and forbids such groups from any type of third-party advertising as part of any election year cycle for any federal office. It would be up to each state to pass a similar type of amendment to their state constitution to create such a ban for sate and local elections. It CAN be done if everyone would get involved. Otherwise, just sit there and complain about nothing getting done.

Thank You, anti-trust proponent! As I have been contacting my State And US Senators', as well as Governors', Representatives' and Local Mayors' Offices over budgets, land use, environmental concerns, taxation, employment obstacles, educational concerns, etc. for years with little result, it has become apparent that this Constitutional Amendment needs to pass. Yet all I get from every reply is Blah, Blah, Blah. And the beat goes on, regardless of which Party or Position I have contacted. A straight standard form reply. Please do not think that my pessimism is from sitting on my thumbs! I agree that everyone has to get on board with anything to make it happen these days, but the Polarization put in place by the actions and methods of Our Governing Elected Officials and Appointees has damaged my belief in the system deeply.

I will certainly go to the sites you have posted, check the info provided, and get involved with them as well should they seem viable.

Thanks VERY much for responding! Appreciate your passion and information. Hopefully this change can occur before I die. The World is turning to @!$%# so fast that some Progress in my Lifetime would be wonderful. Anything at this point.

Peace

Mike, you obviously don't live in Florida; and Romney will carry the state.

Mike how does it fill going through live wrong alot?

Wake up Mike. You are obviously still dreaming that Obama still has a chance.

Mike how does it fill going through live wrong alot?

Bob - how does it feel going through life without being able to form a coherent sentence?

Or being able to spell.

scales, I fell out of my seat on that one. nice :)

Oh they can take Florida. The Right Wing is way out there down here -- this state has a disproportionately high concentration of the righteously indignant, the uneducated misfits, the Christian intolerants, the easily-frightened elderly, and the outright racists. It also has a disproportionately high concentration of lowlife poor, of the leeches of the system, and of the uneducated and uninterested. The difference between the groups is that the former vote and vote Republican, and the latter do not.

3togetReady,

I sure hope it stays this way in Florida. As the state of Florida goes, so does this election.

I see not path to Obama's re-election without carrying Florida (which at this point seems very unlikely)

The GOP will probebly carry Fl largely because they have some of the most stupid people in the nation there.

I know I live here. Look at the Governor they put in. When you have to spend 80 million of your own dollars to win by 1% it has to tell you something.

He is nothing but an ALEC/Koch Bros shill. A history of massive corruption. Fined 1.7billion for Medicare fraud and still gets elected?

Florida has been and always will be a pirate state. It is run by crooks and cheats. Cathrine Harris proved that when she stole 60,000 votes to force a Bush win.

The people here are about as far from critical thinkers as anything I have ever seen.

Maybe there is hope. Jacksonville and Tampa have their first Democratic mayors in 40 years.

They are changing every possible thing they can to discourage voter registration possible. If you register a voter and do not turn the form in with in 48 hours you can go to jail. Early voting has been cut down to 4 days. And more.

The GOP can't play by the rules they have to change them to advantage themselves. They are one pathetic lot.

If Hillary had won the right wing would have made a career out of bashing her every day of her Presidency.

The GOP took such a slap in the face in 2008 it is still stinging. They have NO ideas how to fix the problems they caused, they just don't want anyone else to get credit for doing it to the extent they will drive the country off a cliff to meet their evil ends.

They don'y play by any rules, they make their own, and don't give a crap what anybody thinks. If they cant beat you in the realm of ideas, they will destroy you for having better ideas.

They own the SCOTUS and could give a s##t about anyone but their big business friends that can buy and sell politicians.

They are the scourge of this country. Never Vote Republican.

I think it was that the fact that the Far-left of the Democrat Party turned on the Clintons with their Racist blame game that sealed Hillary's fate. Democrats will play the race card on themselves just as quickly as they play it against the GOP.

I agree Pat had Hillary won and became President us Republicans would have a fight on our hands in 2012, but with Obama the democrats don't stand a chance.

Really Pat, you're having a delusional moment if you think Hillary would have an easier time dealing with Congress.

Any Democrat who occupies the WH will always be a target of the party of hate. You only have to look at what they tried to do to her husband, and he stupidly obliged them. So do you honestly think they would have given her a pass.

So Pat, when you come out of your delusional reverie, if you are a Democrat and dont want a GOP/TPr in the WH, get behind the President and in his words, stop complaining, stop whining, put on your marching shoes and start working for him. If not, go vote for some republican, who will not fight for your rights and those of your friends and family. Your post is not helping and the same goes for some other posters here who profess to be Democrats, yet post talking points for those that hate our President and Democrats.

bob you are dreamin' who is your candidate..none of your choices could win their way out of a paint can.

Hillarity would have been as big a disaster as the Democratic nominee in 2008 as she has been as SOS.

Sorry, Pat, can't agree with you on at all. I didn't support Hillary at the Iowa Caucus for a lot of reasons. I guess some democrats have forgotten that many of us, just as the GOP is doing now, were looking for an alternative to Hillary Clinton. Don't get me wrong, I like her, respect her and think she is capable but, as much as I liked President Clinton, I was tired of the constant Clinton WH drama; you could sum it up as Clinton fatigue.

I am very satisfied with President Obama and very proud of him. He has done a terrific job considering the mess he was left and considering the Party of Obstructionists who have done everything they could to stop him and who continue to block economic growth. President Obama passed HCR which Clinton didn't do; he got new banking regulations passed (Clinton helped de-regulate); he has signed many big pieces of legislation; he ended DADT; he got a new START treaty passed. Is he perfect, does he do everything I would want? No, but he isn't just my President.

In addition, the GOP obstructionists would have done the same thing to a President Hillary Clinton as they have done to President Obama. We only need to look at what they did to President Bill Clinton. It is what the GOP does these days--they do not govern, they obstruct to regain power. Wouldn't matter what democrat had won, their tactics would be the same.

Gingerbread Mamma - I couldn't agree with you more!

Enough with the whining it's time to get to work!

Comments like Pat's accomplish nothing except to add more fuel to the right wing nuts flames of hatred!

Even if I weren't a staunch Obama supporter - I could NEVER imagine voting for any of the clowns running on the right!

*lacing up my marching boots*

PS: Nice post as well Jody! ;o)

Dan G, wrong, just wrong. That was the media's game. You never heard Candidate Obama make those claims about Bill Clinton but you sure heard the Clinton campaign spinning it as the fault of Obama.

Feisty, Gingerbread Mamma, I've got those marching boots on, too! I'm one proud Obama supporter.

When I went to the local Iowa Caucus on that cold, snowy night in early Jan 2009, the biggest share of the attendees were Obama supporters--old, young, in-between, male, female. They gave 2/3 of room to the Obama group and the other third for everyone else and Hillary's group used the hallway. It wasn't close. It was Obama, Edwards, Clinton--1, 2, 3. The voters made their choice and it wasn't Hillary. It was electric in that room.

He should be fired. If he were a CEO hired to turn a struggling company around he would be.

pat,

You are 100% right.

I'm a conservative, didn't like McCain, and under the circumstances actually considered voting for Hillary as the lesser of the 2 practical choices.

Her and Obama's ideology is the same.

However, like her husband, I considered her more of a pragmatist than Obama, not a blind, narcissistic radical that would usurp the rule of law ..... and most certainly the complete disregard of the will of the people.

She would not have probably gone to the extent that Obama did in passing a HCR bill that the majority of Americans were against, she would not have disregarded the will of the people regarding Cap and Trade by executing it by fiat, she would not have destroyed the energy industry the way Obama has, she would have worked more successfully with Congress the way her husband did and I have no doubt she would have shifted more to the middle as he did and ....... would have been re-elected just as Bill had.

Sheez .... the only thing the left has to fall back on today is Bill Clinton's economy. Obama has nothing that America cares about.

Clinton knew how to get re-elected - she would too.

The far, extreme left will never understand, but they are a very small and irrelevent minority at this point.

Anyway ... just an honest opinion.

thetotas. The one who should have been fired was named George W. Bush but he was a republican so the mess he made doesn't count on Planet Conservative. Should Governor Perry be fired? Afterall, unemployment is on the rise in Texas, he has failed to solve the $26 billion budget deficit in TX, he cut funds to fire departments and now TX is burning, etc etc etc.

Feisty and Jody, thanks for the shout and thanks for posting your thoughts. It is campaign time and it is time to stand with our candidate, I agree with you I would never think of voting for any of the republican candidates, and until any of their leaders stand up and say no more to booing at gay soldiers, cheering at the possibility of someone dying due to lack of insurance or cheering for executions, I will do all in my power as limited as it is, to defeat them.

I refuse to accept that kind of thinking as normal and to live under rulers who think like that. NO MORE

You fools that say Hillary would have done better need to stop smoking whatever it is you smoke. The Reps absolutely HATED Hillary and would have continued with both the "NO vote tactic" on everything she proposed or started yet ANOTHER investigation into the Clintons for whatever made-up theory they could think of. I suppose you guys think Obama should be like King and be able to get done everything he says just by making a pronouncement. However, from day one the Reps voted NO on everything. Even things they earlier voted FOR. Reason? Just to prevent him a "win" as some Reps have been quoted. Then two years later with the teabaggers running the House, they basically hold all of us hostage to THEIR ideas and to hell with the rest of us.

Back on subject, I have always felt primaries should be all on the same day. The fact the these two little dinky states have the power to actually weed out the candidates for the rest of us, just isn't the way it should be. Now we have the oh so great state of Florida tellling us they don't care about the rules, they just want to be at the head of the class. I don't need a bunch of retired a holes telling ME who should run or helping weed out the class anymore than I need Iowa or New Hampshire doing this. Folks, this whole process is broken. Starting with the awful SCOTUS ruling regarind fund raising.

I'm not sure I buy your argument. Both candidates agreed to the rules at the beginning of the campaign, and thus neither candidate campaigned in Florida or Michigan. In fact, Obama wasn't even on the ballot in MI. Thus, Hilary never really had a leg to stand on when it came to challenging the delegates after the fact. The time to challenge was before the campaign started, not after the non-binding contest was over because she won. She certainly wouldn't have challenged the results if she lost.

However, I believe that Hilary might have made a better president than Obama. If anything else, Hilary would have known when it was time to stand up and fight, instead of Obama, who might as well be a alligator laying belly-up to the predators of the Republican party. Obama just doesn't have it in him to fight hard for the policies he claims to believe in---unless it's election time.

thetotas

This is America. CEOs are paid millions to run big companies into the ground. US Airlines, GM, Chrysler, ETC.

It's what they do best. God help the U.S. if our major industries were run by intelligent people able to make good long range plans and see beyond the next quarter.

[He should be fired. If he were a CEO hired to turn a struggling company around he would be.]

thetotas,

Haven't you heard? The GOP/Tea Party wants to run the United States like a company...A Republican president would, in effect, be a CEO...and...

[CEOs are paid millions to run big companies into the ground.]

Why does the GOP/Tea Party hate America?

I have to wonder who ties those boots for you! And Mickey funny how most of our big companies are doing great and holding a lot of cash..... So what is it...... running into the ground or doing great. You cant have it both ways. And as far as the Auto companies it was more a combo of management and Unions that caused that train wreck, however now the unions own the companies (except Ford) so we shall see how this will work. The unions are already asking for more, even though they now know the bottom line. My guess is they will push the companies to just below where they can be profitable and sit there. Knowing that they need the company to be viable, the thing that pisses them off is that they can not just take the company to the cleaners.....because the company is them! OhMy!

Maxine Waters wants to Know......"who the hell he be talking about, he certainly did talk to the jews or the gays or any of the other groups in that manner......Who the hell are you talking about. Maxine must have had to change her depends several times during that speech!

The point is that the USA is not a business, it's a government. The responsibility of the CEO of a business is to make money. The responsibility of a government is to uphold order and growth in a society for all its people.

I am just glad that all of you can vote for and support Obama, but if you do not live in Florida, Carolinas, Virginia, Ohio etc and have A LOT of friends, it is not going to matter.

Obama has given us a gift. We can nominate the most right wing nut we want. And we will still win.

The talk is right. If Hillary was in there, we would not have that luxury. As much distain as I have for her, She would pose more of a threat and curb any potential for anything less than a moderate candidate on the GOP ticket.

But this is why Romney will not be the candidate. We can go further right and we know it. And we will.

THANK YOU OBOMA. Finally we will get a real conservative in office.

As I have stated before--------- If the T-publicans really thought Obama wouldnt sweep the floor with their sorry acess in the next election they would be all for him being our candidate! But they know they cant win so they are screaming for the Dems. to run someone else!

Think about that!

Obama 2012

While Ron Paul as a few good ideas, a vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Obama.

Dan, Ron Paul is polling a few points behind Obama in a mock general election. Your attitude is the reason we have never had a winning third party candidate. The media repeats and reinforces your position endlessly. Watch a few Paul videos, and it will soon be obvious that he has so much more integrity than the other standard politicians.

That is true. It's also true that his heart's desire is to take us back to the 1920s.

1920's Rlquall, try the 1600's maybe.

Oh, sure, let's put it back in the hands of the cigar smoking, big money choosers instead of allowing the citizens to select who THEY want.

Apparently Mabel wants to see more "moderates" like Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, and Adali Stevenson.

Let the nominee be chosen on the convention floor based on his ability to unite and not divide, then turn him or her loose to sell the platform to the public before the election.

Mabel -- Have you ever actually read a party platform? If you have, you are in like a .001% minority, as nobody does. Even most of the platform committee only reads the part that they are in on fashioning. And the only reason they still have them at all is that they "always have" and it gives people something to keep them busy and makes them feel important. They are one of the most useless things for ending the lives of perfectly good trees in existence. If they ever served any purpose it ended a half-century ago.

Yes I have. I don't spend all my time watching Desperate Housewives or reading the National Enquirer.

I would agree that you have found a way that is superior to both of those as far as passing time. If you've followed anything much that I've said here over time, much of it is devoted to the theme that people constantly are saying that they're just "too busy" to follow "politics" (a/k/a/ how their tax money is being spent) but the same people have time to keep up with their fantasy football teams and watch Jerry Springer. But I'm afraid that my point is still valid. Platforms are way, way out of the mainstream; their readers would number in the thousands in this country of 300,000,000+. The politically active people I know are aware of this and will no longer be silenced by being placed on a platform committee at any level, which they have come to regard as something of a fool's errand.

It used to be almost that way, starting with New Hampshire in March and ending with California in June.

Each state wants to maximize its own advantage. Sadly, it's one of the few areas of true bipartisan co-operation left, and it's not really about the common good.

Wouldn't surprise me but I sure hope not. Phone calls 2 years ahead is bad enough, that would mean 3 years of surveys and Mitt Romney thinking I'm a republican.

They already do that. Mitt Romney's been campaigning for 5 years; John Edwards started campaigning in Iowa in 2005 until he dropped out (thank goodness for that).

Jody -- And would you agree that Barry has been campaigning just as long as Mitt has been?

Repugnicans...you must feel so clever. Where did you ever come up with that? Here's the fact: if you have to resort to name-calling (terribly unclever, over-used name-calling at that), you're point is irrelevant.

I'm so sick of all these comments with "Re-puke-licans" and "Dumbocrats". Why not make intelligent, thought out comments, even if they might be controversial, instead of just adding to the vitriol?

they can't...

Strange comments coming from individuals who apparently never heard the Coulters', Breitbarts', Levins', Savages', and those hundreds of others on a daily basis who slander any who stand in the way of wealth redistribution from the working class to the upper tiers.

There is daylight above the rocks. Take a chance. Take a peek.

Another good post thetotas !

Thanks!

It's the RNC and the DNC that select who goes first. After each election, the respective party organizations decide so if you want to change the system, it is necessary to lobby the two national party groups.

I can say that Iowans take their politics seriously as does the people of New Hampshire. Iowans put the candidates to the test, demand town halls, demand meets in livingrooms and fully expect candidates to tow the mark. Fred Thompson failed miserably here because he wasn't willing to do those things. I will say that the Iowa GOP has shifted far right, so not sure how relevant their choices are to the rest of the country.

Neither of those states is in any way representative of this country. They're too white, too rural, too small, you name it. And, as has been previously pointed out, a large proportion of their populations still take politics and civic responsibility to be serious and of importance. How much more atypical of America than that can you possible get?

Uhh, don't you remeber this EXACT same thing happening with the DNC 4 years ago?

Matt,

Yep I do... but the RNC only took half their delegates for that year only - it would be a much bigger ouch if they lost 75% for each of the next 3 elections... and it would nullify their reason for jumping ahead of the pack.

I like Iowa going first too.

They make me laugh so hard I get a side stich.

Are they not always on the hook for the cleanup bill, whether it's in a "fund" or not? If the Florida taxpayers aren't on the "hook for it", who is? Wyoming taxpayers?

Not really its called Insurance. try it some time......it works pretty well!

I agree with you, jollyoldsoul1, with regards to personal property.

I think MTATL671 is suggesting Florida needs more reserves to pay for everybody's personal damage. Considering these reserves come from taxpayers, his/her argument is rather confusing. He/she says FL "only has about $7B in its account" (which came from FL taxpayers), and in turn says that because of that supposedly small amount, taxpayers will be on the hook. It's a strange argument.

They violate their own rules, which says tons to those on the outside looking in.

Do you not remember the DNC doing this EXACT same thing 4 years ago? Don't be partisan just to be cool.

Sure do. Both Florida and Michigan who held early primaries lost their votes on the convention floor. They regained them only after Clinton suspended her campaign making the entire issue moot. It was wrong for both states then, it is wrong now. It was a fiasco for the Dems last time and plainly the Reps learned nothing from it. No one seems to be able to learn from history.

Totally agree :)

DM77,

Those "crummy little states" are also highly literate and in this way do a better job of weeding out the worst in both parties.

Iowa highly literate? Please. No more so than Kansas, Nebraska, Ohio or any other state. And New Hampshire hasn't been in the political center since, well, the constitutional convention.

d_m77, Why just set the time at 1 year. 6 months should be more than enough time for the American voter to decide who is best suited for the office of President. Here we are in Sept 2011 and the election for POTUS is 14 months away. Huge amounts of money are being spent and the emotional energy being spent by those of us reading these blogs....is huge. In England, Parliment can be desolved and elections scheduled a few weeks hence.

I think that it would be well worth amending the Constitution to go towards something like the Canadian/British system. But it won't happen because the popular groundswell toward it will never happend because of too many unengaged people -- the same reason that we'll always have the Electoral College.

Nay. This would be the last step to eliminating our states' rights. The more power the federal gov't takes away from the states the more mob-rule takes over.

However, I'm unclear what you mean with regards to any election other than President. Are you suggesting that California gets to vote on who becomes Georgia's governor? These are already handled by popular vote within the states.

Rudy, With the exception of the Presidential election, all state and local elections are based on "one man, one vote". Only the Office of President is subject to the rules of the Electoral College. Under those rules, each state gets one elector for each seat in congress (# of reps in the House + # of Senators (always 2 Senators). Small states get a mathematical advantage from the 2 Senators. However, the rules for dividing the electors are dictated by each state (not the Federal Govt) and the rules vary from state to state (States Rights). Some states are "winner take all" and some are divided up based on the % of votes. The "winner take all" method usually gets "grumbles" from the looser. Surprisingly, the electoral colleges only meet in each state capital and send the results to the Federal Senate to be tabulated. The individual electoral colleges never meets in a join session. And while an elector is on the slate of electors for a particular candidate, he is usually committed to voting for the candidate on the first vote only. In the event there is no clear winner (in a Winner Take All" state), he is allowed to cast his vote for another candidate on subsequent votes and "the will of the voters" goes out the window.

Allen West was born in Atlanta, Georgia, Crist was born in Altoona, Pennsylvania, Rick Scott was born in Bloomington, Illinois, and raised in Kansas City, Missouri, Jeb Bush was born in Midland, Texas, as well as plenty others being Floridians in Office Only. FOOs. At least we have a few Born Floridians left.

We seem to have many carpetbaggers and Banana Republicans and Corporate Plants in our last decade or so of Elections, with much to gain personally as opposed to caring about Florida.Though Crist wasn't too bad even if he might have been bucking for VP. Guess that is the Business and Nature of Politics.

And it shows.

Copy that, luvenia48!

48,

So FL will be just as "rigged" and "corrupt" whether it goes 1st, middle, or last, right? So if the good citizens there want to exercise some "states rights", then they can move the primary, right? Also, if they good citizens there (and I lived there too for 4 years during my USAF years from 1987-1990), THEY can clean up the corruption.

When a republican wins its a bought election, when a dem wins everythings fine.

Greg, look at Chicago and Detroit (im a Florida resident but I live in Detroit 3/4 of the year). We have 330k registered Democratic voters and TADA........ 315k people old enough to vote. And the democratic registrar has stated nothing can be done about it until AFTER the election. Hmmmmmm where have I heard that before?

I can imagine luvenia48 is a 9/11 Truther. The idea that state or national elections can be rigged to force a certain outcome is ludicrous. I'm not going to say there is never any cheating whatsoever, but on the level it would take to change the results of an election?? Come on. Do you realize how many people would have to be involved and how many other people "on the lookout" they would have to get by?

I'm a conservative, but you give us too much credit.

Lawton Chiles was the last decent elected Democratic Governor of Florida. Charlie Crist was the last decent governor elected in Florida since Chiles. Crist proved to be less concerned with pure politics and actually did some things that had poitive repercussions for the state.

Scott has or is working hard to overturn those things. Scott will not even show his face in Public, other than one day working in a Donut Shop to show he is a man of the people...

jollyoldsoul1,

Where there is a will, there is a way. Wisconsin did recall elections. Detroit has the "Detroit Free Press". The Federal Election Commission may offer guidance. Then there is your state gov't. There is more than one way to tackle corruption.

It also makes a good case for having photo ID on hand on election day. Dead people make horrible photos, especially after a few years. ha ha

Moving the FLA primary ahead is an effort to end the Republican "blood letting" well before the election in November. A lesson learned here in California when Gov Shwarzenegger's term ended. Republican Meg Whitman went after Republican Poisner in the primary and it was ugly. When the dust settled, Democrat Jerry Brown had the final election wrapped up in "the 2nd inning".

Greg, look at Chicago and Detroit (im a Florida resident but I live in Detroit 3/4 of the year). We have 330k registered Democratic voters and TADA........ 315k people old enough to vote.

Hmm, Jolly, are you registered to vote in Detroit, Florida, or both?

The most common type of voter fraud isn't "illegals" sneaking into the polls, or "zombie voters", it's rich people with multiple residences who put in a vote for each residence.

Yep. Lots of people voted for Al Gore in NY and Florida in 2000. They're finally supposed to be interfacing all of the states voter data bases to cross-reference this, just as we do county-to-county within most states to make sure no one is claiming more than one residence for voting purposes. Of course, some municipalities allow people to vote in municipal elections as long as they own property within the corporate limits. This is OK as long as it stops at municipal elections.

psssst your the minority sir......kinda hard to win with out us Independents and we are currently center right.

Who is your candidate of choice, JOS1? Just wondering also, did you vote for Obama last time? Honesty, please.

Thank you.

Jolly Old Soul 1 - "Center right" would make you left of far right..... And since you haven't yet made the choice to join the "far right", I suspect you are still listening to the quiet voice of reason that is the hallmark of the Independant voter.

I also agree it wont be close. BHO will lose the crutial battleground states that have determined the winner in the majority of elections. Where do you live Pittmanlaw? Is it in Florida? Virginia? Ohio? If not, then your opinion and your vote wont count regardless.

Every voter in New York can vote for BHO, and it wont matter one bit. Every nut job in California can as well, with no effect.

Once you guys figure this out, and see how poorly BHO is doing in the states where it matters, you will realize how lost the cause is. It is almost a forgone conclusion he does not carry Florida. And without this state alone, his path to victory is an extreme longshot.

So you tell me, how do you figure he wins (let alone a landslide, which is laughable)

how do you figure he wins

Barely, which is all it takes. But there is absolutely no guarantee, other than his current possible final opponents look even more weak or out of Rep/TP style, for sure.

Either way, it will still be a referendum of what the Voting Public knows over what it thinks it knows or is told to know.