"Florida and Michigan have a right to vote for a Democratic nominee."

This statement is reminiscent of George Carlin's new act. "There are no 'rights.'"
In this case, it's more true than you know.

Let's review the history of the nominating process:

"In the early 19th century, members of Congress met within their party caucuses to select their party's nominee. Conflicts between the interests of the Eastern Congressional class and citizens in newer Western states led to the hotly contested 1824 election, in which factions of the Democratic-Republican Party rejected the caucus nominee, William H. Crawford of Georgia, and backed John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and Andrew Jackson instead.

In 1831 the Anti-Masonic Party convened in Baltimore, Maryland to select a single presidential candidate agreeable to the whole party leadership in the 1832 presidential election. The National Republican Party and the Democratic Party soon followed suit.

Conventions were often heated affairs, playing a vital role in deciding who would be the nominee. The process remained far from democratic or transparent, however. The party convention was a scene of intrigue among political bosses, who appointed and otherwise controlled nearly all of the delegates. Winning a nomination involved intensive negotiations and multiple votes; the 1924 Democratic National Convention required a record 103 ballots to nominate John W. Davis. The term dark horse candidate was coined at the 1920 Republican National Convention, at which little-known Ohio Senator Warren G. Harding emerged as the candidate.

A few, mostly Western states adopted primary elections in the late 19th century and during the Progressive Era, but the catalyst for their widespread adoption came during the election of 1968. The Vietnam War energized a large number of supporters of anti-war Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, but they had no say in the matter. Vice President Hubert Humphrey—associated with the unpopular administration of Lyndon B. Johnson—did not compete in a single primary, yet controlled enough delegates to secure the Democratic nomination. This proved one of several factors behind rioting which broke out at the convention in Chicago."
________________________

When someone says, "You are disenfranchising Floridians and Michiganders" I get pissed. Although the definition of "disenfranchise" includes the denial of a privelege to someone, it implies that you are denying the RIGHT to vote to someone. The denial of a privelege is the party's prerogative.

People shouldn't bitch and whine about it, especially because Hilldabeast is basically mathematically eliminated (in terms of delegates) regardless of Michigan and Florida's outcome.