Are we, Democrats, too anal?

[question everything]

Take the Iowa Caucuses. Republicans go, vote, and back home, which is what normal people should do in a cold winter evening in the Midwest. Democrats talk on and on, first a viability hurdle then the horse trading (been there, done that).

Now, Democrats are punishing Michigan and Florida for moving their primaries before Feb. 5th, while Republicans don't have any problem with this. (I don't have a problem with punishing them, but with setting the rules in the first place).

Is this a way to elect a president?

And, really, it is not the "audacity" of Iowa and New Hampshire in telling the rest of us who should be the nominee; it is the other candidates who gave up.

I wonder: would Biden, Dodd and Richardson stayed had the Michigan primary had teeth?

I almost wish that they had given us IOUs: I will refund your donation if I defect before Feb. 5th.

Sigh..

[patrice]

1. Some of what you're seeing going on is not purely Democratic.

There's LOTS of cross-over and "Independent" stuff going this year, not all of which is surreptitious, but it doesn't take much to set others off when you know the hot buttons. And when folks with hidden agendas mess with the process and there are lots of innocent newbies around, stuff happens.

P.S. There are many synonyms for what people are using the word "anal" to refer to that are ever so much more appealing. Unlike the f-word, anal has few and very specific referrants which do what you are trying to say a serious dis-service.