"I am stunned that we have the gall and chutzpa to substitute our judgement for 600,000 voters" was what Harold Ickes stated to the DNC yesterday when that organization decided to award the delegates of Florida and Michigan half a vote each.
Soooo many things wrong that sentiment and others held by the Clinton camp.

1- Bricotrout is stunned that Clinton and her supporters were in favor of not counting Florida's and Michigan's votes a few months ago when it seemed apparent she wouldn't need them to secure her nomination. Then flip flop on the issue once it became obvious she would not be able to win the nomination without them. Changing the rules in the middle of an election is counter to the spirit of democracy.

2- Bricotrout is stunned that The DNC has created and utilized the concept of 'super delegates' which are individual voters selected to have their vote worth not 1 simple vote as every other voter in the U.S. but rather worth 1 delegate vote which is worth closer to 10,000 or so individual votes. That itself is completely counter to the ideals of democracy. '1 person, 1 vote' is what 'democracy' means... nothing less. In short, Mr. Ickes, the entire concept of 'substituting the votes of many for the judgement of one' is what the Democratic Party has been about for years.

3- Bricotrout is stunned that Clinton and her supporters actually believe it is a fair concept to award the delegates of Michigan as their votes were cast when Obama and every other major candidate except Clinton had withdrawn their names from the voting ballot and had not campaigned there as they had all agreed to do weeks earlier! This one floors me!

Clearly the Clinton camp are not supporters of democracy.
Here's how I got there:
One thing that has always made my jaw tighten and my teeth grit is when I hear of underhanded tactics meant to suppress peoples votes, their will to vote or for whom their vote will be cast.
In 2004 people were registering to vote in front of a Walmart (what state/states I do not recall). It seems the people collecting the registration forms systematically disposed of all forms that had the Republican Party affiliation box checked. Hence, these diligent would-be voters were never registered and not allowed to vote in the end. Actions carried out by individuals who are not true believers of democracy.
It is now well known that in 2000 Karl Rove spearheaded a smear campaign of then Governor Bush's Republican opponent John McCain by spreading (if not flat out creating) the lie that McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child.
It was more important to The Bush camp that people vote based on untruths rather than truth itself (a philosophy that was repeated BTW in drumming up public support for an illegal war that has since caused the death of nearly 4000 U.S. soldiers). Such an attitude is in direct contrast to the ideal of 'democracy' itself.
One who supports democracy supports the idea of the elected official being nominated by having collected the most individual votes in a fair, level-playing-field election whereupon rules are established ahead of time and not changed halfway through the process; and whereupon as many able bodied voters are included the process as possible.
Clinton and all her tear-shedding, wailing, foot-stomping, tantrum-throwing, belly-aching supporters who want delegates issued to her, that she did not win in primaries where all candidates campaigned (again, as earlier agreed upon by all involved!), are not supporters of democracy at this stage.
One who supports democracy believes that it is in the union's best interest for it to be run by an individual who was elected by a majority of the voting public after a fair and honest campaign on the issues.
How can someone who supports democracy and wants their vote cast and counted, vote for someone who clearly wants to collect their votes in a process that they have manipulated to favor them in an unbalanced way?
That is not democracy and that voter is not a supporter of democracy.
Plain and simple!