Florida and Michigan

As you may know, Florida and Michigan were stripped of their delegates for holding their primaries earlier than they were supposed to. It seemed that every damn state wanted to be first in line. So what's a voter to do? The state announces that the primary is on day X. First off, considering that delegates and super-delegates are only now beginning to be understood by the general public, the majority of voters probably didn't even know that the primary was too early and violated party rules. And even if a voter did, what is he or she going to say, "No, I'm not going to vote on day X because it violates party rules?" The state said that the primary was on day X, and so voters showed up to vote - it's as simple as that.

So, my question is, why punish the voters? The voters were not the ones who made the decision to hold the primaries early, the state's political leaders were. Why are you going to silence 2 million voters for something that is not even their fault? And for that matter, why punish the candidates (namely Hillary in this case)? Was it Hillary's decision to hold the Florida and Michigan primaries early? No.

You hear all this talk about how Obama is in the lead with total votes and delegates, but they aren't factoring in that additional 600,000 who voted for Hillary in those two states and the majority of the 366 delegates who would have been awarded to her.

Anyway, is anything fundamentally changed if the date of the primary is different than what is 'allowed'? I mean come on. The voters have spoken.