It's like the fool that keeps buying one fifty cent flashlight after another and then curses them because they don't work.

I largely agree with you, but still favor some kind of reform. I thought the Democrats pretty much laid the ground work for this by making the penalty too harsh.

If they had done what the Republicans did and just cut their number of delegates in half, it wouldn't look like they were trying to disenfranchise two entire states. It would be harder for candidates (Hillary) to argue for changing the penalty if it had been less harsh.

Robert

And I’m not sure what the fix for the Michigan and Florida problem would look like. Either we have no rules and we let states continually jockey for first place, wreaking havok with campaign strategies and making a mockery of the process or we have rules and enforce them.

James, Michigan and Florida aren't a problem for the American electoral system, they're a problem for the DNC and IMO they're only a problem because the DNC let them become one. There are a host of prospective solutions.

They could hold to their guns and continue to refuse to seat the delegates. They could cave and seat them. They could offer to seat all the delegates elected in a second primary. And so on.

But it's an intra-party squabble not a general problem with the electoral system.

I see two problems-one-will the candidates that aren't the big money recievers early be able to realistically compete in a nationwide primary for the same day. Two-should the states be forced to pay for two primaries in the same year. Although, part of the answer for the second is to have the parties fund at least one if not both of the primary elections.