Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
FL and MI not going to be a factor
It’s time to be honest. The Florida and Michigan issue is not an issue for the Democratic nomination. It’s only an issue for the general election.
This election game started more than a year ago and everyone knew the rules of the game. I think everyone can agree that the rules ended up being pretty stupid and though it was a huge mistake, neither Senator Clinton or Senator Obama bothered to make a big fuss about the rules of the game in the past.
Why was that? Clinton probably assumed she would win no matter what. (Wrong) Obama might have thought it would never matter he was so behind (Wrong) Both of them didn’t want to offend Iowa or New Hampshire (Wrong and Right, Right and Wrong) or Nevada and South Carolina by fighting for another states early primary (Right and Wrong, Wrong and Right).
It’s disingenuous now for Clinton to be making the argument based on disenfranchisement because if she wants to be a leader, she should have taken a stand before she knew the results or knew she’d be far behind. At the same time, Obama should be a little more out there fighting for the rights of Florida and Michigan.
In the end though, as I said, everyone knew the rules of the game and everyone agreed to them. Given that, if seating Michigan and Florida’s delegates from essentially uncontested primaries gave Clinton a victory, that would be far worse for the party than even the Super Delegates a nominee who isn’t ahead in pledged delegates.
What does that mean? It means the Florida and Michigan delegates are only going to be seated if it doesn’t affect the outcome of the nomination. The Clinton campaign has basically acknowledged that they can’t win without Florida and Michigan. The Democrats can’t change their rules to take the nomination from the winner. So, Florida and Michigan just don’t matter.
That doesn't mean the voters of FL and MI won't be offended. The Dems should be figuring out ways to deal with this. Obama should be saying a lot more in favor of seating Michigan and Florida, he’s won, stop worrying. For the good of the party, Clinton and Obama should come to an agreement on Florida and Michigan, that includes Clinton dropping out of the race a week or two later.
Comments (6)
I agree, except that I don't see how Obama is involved in this. The National Democratic Party made the rules, and got agreement from all of the state Democratic Parties and from all of the presidential candidates. That settled the issue of when all of the states could hold their primaries or caucuses. From that point on, Senator Obama withdrew his candidacy in Michigan as he agreed to, and would have done the same in Florida if Florida laws had permitted him to do so. His involvement in that issue was over then.
The only one to remain involved with the issue was Senator Clinton, and only because she cannot win without being able to count the "results" of those two illegal elections. It isn't Senator Obama's job to make it easier for Senator Clinton to win. Nor is it his job to clean up the mess made by the governments in Florida and Michigan - it wouldn't even be ethical for him to presume to try.
Once the convention in convened, there is a process in place to handle this issue, and it will do so per the convention rules. Aren't we a nation of rules?
March 31, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
For anything to happen, doesn't the DNC have to officially make an announcement that it has changed its position on not seating the delegates? Did I miss something? Since when do the campaigns have the right to change the official position of the DNC? Everyone has been wringing their hands over this, and yet, as far as I know, the DNC has to be the first to make the call that it has changed its mind and wants to over-rule its previous decision to not seat the delegates. WTF?
March 31, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
To astral and Hoppy:
Sure there are rules, and they are enforced by the DNC. But come on: no one seriously disputes that if the two remaining candidates agreed on a method for seating the delegations, the DNC would jump on board in a heartbeat.
March 31, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one could have foreseen the problem of Fl. and MI before these primaries started. If the DNC, FL, and MI knew this would happen, someone would have given in.
Rather than find someone to blame, I think it is more important to look forwards and come to the realization that FL. and MI will be an issue in the nomination process and the GE. It may or may not determine who the nominee is, but they will have to find a way to seat the delegates. If it is not going to be a re-vote, it at least has to look fair. The 50/50 split will not work. I think I may be able to live with some of the latest proposals that are being bandied about in MI and FL.
March 31, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you mean, no one could have foreseen the problems?
They were repeatedly warned REPEATEDLY, even as each state pressed on step-by-step to their own folly.
Your assertion is blatantly ridiculous on its face. Please research the history, read media articles published as they slogged into infamy. Then you'll know they made their decision with deliberate defiance in their statements even as they were warned, not only by the national committee, but by in-state concerns as well.
They knew they were heading for a train wreck and it is utterly dishonest for Clinton to be telling the other 48 states that their will as expressed through a unanimous of 450 democrats nationwide is worthless.
Talk about whoring the American public. Just like she helped whore the lives of over 4000 volunteer patriots.
March 31, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give me break. Yeah, yeah, its all evil Hillary's fault. Scream all you want. Fact remains, it is going to be problem.
Warning the states repeatedly had nothing to do clairvoyance.
They will be seated and its time we think about a reasonable solution.
March 31, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment