Donuts And Politics

Being a Michigander, as many readers are, I want to ask for responses on what the best thing to do with our delegates would be? Clinton today said both the votes in Florida and Michigan were fair (see below). Here are options as I see them (feel free to offer others):

1.  Let things stand as they are, with the two states in violation of the primary rules, and neither state seats any delegates at the Convention. The states have to accept the consequence, which they knew of, for their attempt to circumvent the Party’s rules.

2.  Split the delegates 50-50 between the two candidates and seat them that way.

3. Hold a re-vote in some manner: primary, caucus, or mail-in.

4. Admit the results as they are with Clinton winning both states.

Thoughts?

At this point, I don’t believe in rewarding bad behavior. If a re-vote were to occur, it would probably come in June and make the two states perhaps the most significant contests of all as the last two to go. This is just like my classroom–students are made aware of the rules and if students break the rules, they deal with the consequences. If you skip class on the day of a test, you receive a 0 on the test, you fail. You don’t get to come in another day and redo it just because you didn’t like what day it was on or you weren’t prepared for it. Exactly the same situation here! I put the blame squarely on the democratic leadership of our state. There are a lot of things I don’t agree with about the primary process, but this was an idiotic way of trying to change it.

I would have liked the chance to vote for Obama, but now this is just becoming a ploy by the Clinton campaign to stretch out the contests and try to make up votes. I don’t think a mail-in primary is a good idea because of the clear lack of security and potential for fraud. If you want representation from the two states, split the delegates 50-50 and call it a day.  Honestly though, I think Michigan has to bite the bullet for our leaders being complete morons and I’m ok with that. Teach other states not to try to pull a fast one next time.

Clinton Statements 

What really irks me is that Clinton is trying to change the rules in the middle of the game. You don’t do that in cards, you don’t do that in a primary election. Look at her statement today:

The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that’s wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

Come again? If Obama was trying this I would say the same thing–BS! You call this a fair election:

Michigan: Clinton was the only name on the ballot and neither candidate campaigned here.

Florida: Neither candidate campaigned in the state.

Both campaigns agreed at the beginning of the process that they would not campaign in either state and that the results would not count. I am not really sure how anyone can look at this situation and call either election fair. Apparently what’s fair to the Clinton campaign is whatever advantages them. How you can make this argument with a straight face is really beyond me. Its completely disingenuous and dishonest to say that a competition in which neither person campaigned and in one case you were running unopposed, was fair.

Here is a memo from David Plouffe about Obama’s strategy and why Pennsylvania is just one of 10 remaining contests, not THE sole deciding state. I thought it was interesting and I totally agree with what they are saying, its a sound argument and strategy.

To: Interested Parties

From: David Plouffe, Campaign Manager

Date: March 12, 2008

RE: Moving On to the Next 10 Contests

With his overwhelming victory in the Mississippi primary, Barack Obama’s lead in pledged delegates is now wider than it was on March 3, before the contests in Ohio and Texas. He netted more delegates in Mississippi and Wyoming than Senator Clinton netted on March 4. Obama now holds a pledged delegate lead of 161 with a total of 1411 pledged delegates, while Senator Clinton trails with 1250 pledged delegates. As the number of remaining pledged delegates dwindles, Hillary Clinton’s path to the nomination seems less and less plausible.

Barack Obama has now won nearly thirty contests, over half the states in the country, including critical battleground states like Virginia, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, Missouri, Washington and Colorado.

Now that Mississippi is behind us, we move on to the next ten contests. The Clinton Campaign would like to focus your attention only on Pennsylvania – a state in which they have already declared that they are “unbeatable.” But Pennsylvania is only one of 10 remaining contests, each important in terms of allocating delegates and ultimately deciding who are nominee will be. Senator Obama campaigned in Pennsylvania yesterday and will do so again later this week, but he will also campaign aggressively in the other upcoming states – he will travel to other upcoming states in the very near future.

We have activated our volunteer networks, are putting staff on the ground, and building our organization in every one of the upcoming states. The key is not who wins the states that the Clinton campaign thinks are important. Throughout this entire process, they have cherry-picked states, diminished caucuses, and moved the goal posts to create a shifting, twisted rationale for why they should win the nomination despite winning fewer primaries, fewer states, fewer delegates, and fewer votes.