Are all DUers voting in the Primaries when it comes to their states?

[Aussie leftie]

If not, why not? If you do not participate in your own democratic process, you will not be in any position to complain if the wrong person gets up. The USA is not the only country that will be effected by the outcome of this election, it will be the rest of the world. Please do your duty.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

1. reporting for duty

:patriot:

[rocknrush]

2. you betcha

[Double T]

3. Yes. If there are any other candidates left in the race besides Obama.

[Aussie leftie]

10. Do you feel that Obama has more charisma than political knowledge?

I used to support Hilary Clinton until I saw her give Bush a standing ovation when he "declared" war on Iraq. I have always liked John Edwards; probably because he appeals to my socialist side.

[Double T]

17. Obama has charisma. Edwards has POWER and STRENGTH.

What this country needs in a President is POWER and STRENGTH to fight the wall street and corporate insurgents that have and are continuing to destroy our nation. Charisma is for popularity contests and doesn't solve problems.

[Aussie leftie]

20. PS I adopted a homeless dog

[Double T]

23. I'm certain your dog thanks YOU everyday of his new life.

Thanks for being such a good person and sharing your life and home with your new family member!

[BlueStater]

4. It depends

If Hillary and Barack are my only options, then no.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. Send me money.

Then I'll vote.

Actually, I've voted in every primary since 1972 (missed '68 because I happened to be in Vietnam at the time), and will this time too, whether my state ends up having any say in the outcome or not.

The problem is that the whole thing might be decided before the last primaries are held. Early states carry most of the weight in the decision.

[calimary]

6. You bet! My only complaint is that California doesn't get to vote sooner.

We're moved up into the Super-Duper Tuesday roles on February 5th along with 23 other states (a few have only one party's primary that day and the other party's primary on another day). It will be interesting to see if that gives us any more of a voice out here. Up til now, the nominee was already locked in and our voice meant nothing by the time our turn came to submit it. I still voted anyway. Last time, proudly, for Howard Dean, even though Kerry had sewn it up handily long beforehand.

[Aussie leftie]

14. Would it be a fairer system if every state voted in a primary on the same day?

I'm not trying to be facetious, but it would certainly stop the waste of millions of dollars being poured into the few states that go first.

[cynatnite]

16. Maybe not...

Those states with the most delegates would get the most attention by the candidates. I don't see it being much better that way.

[calimary]

25. Yeah. It most certainly would be! That's a great idea!

I mean, if you look at a schedule of the primaries, they're all over the frickin' place between now and JUNE! In some cases, each party has its own primary on different days. It's a mess.

http://www.vote-smart.org/election_president_state_primary_dates.php

It would be a LOT more fair and egalitarian if primary day was the same EVERYWHERE. No bullshit. ONE DAY and it's over with, and it's decided.

And yeah, it might be hard for some candidates to spread themselves thin enough to go everywhere by that date. But I'm one of those annoying people with the California complex and it sounds like the most reasonable solution to me.

I don't know. It's hard to say. I'm kinda worked up about it at the moment and may be letting emotions get the better of me. I got smacked around a little in another thread around here because of it, just a bit earlier today. But considering the argument about giving the most attention to the biggest states with the biggest delegates, I still feel as though a larger-population state has more people who, for that single reason, are and would be more affected by any federal policy or decision to come down the pike. So why shouldn't we have a larger say?

BTW - Welcome to DU!!!

[melody]

7. That's only how it is now (re: our influence)

Bush's job was to destroy us, so I wouldn't worry about us much longer. We'll be a forgotten relic and the
globalists will have moved on.

Maybe then we can finally have our own country back. Then we can vote for the ones who will actually help Americans
instead of international rich people.

[OHdem10]

8. Absoutely positively

[DesertRat]

9. Absolutely!

:hi:

[Little Star]

11. YES!

[cynatnite]

12. That's bullshit!

Vote or not vote...every person has a right to complain to their heart's content.

Anyone who chooses not to vote doesn't mean they lose their freedom of speech.

[femmocrat]

13. Yes, but it will be all over by the time we get to vote in PA.

We are disenfranchised in the presidential primaries.

[Aussie leftie]

15. What do you think a solution to that problem should be

[Wwagsthedog]

18. Only if DK is on the Texas Primary Ballot. nt

[emilyg]

19. Yes.

[kdmorris]

21. Of course I am

It won't count for shit, except to maybe let everyone know who "won the Florida Primary". Maybe it will give someone a boost going into "Super Tuesday".

[SunDrop23]

22. Of course, why wouldn't I? (n/t)

[dsc]

24. I have a May primary

I likely will have only one candidate on my ballot. I will be voting for Senate though and several statewide offices governor, lt governor, etc.

[Forkboy]

26. yes