The democratic party is tricky. Everything in this year's primary has created so much free media coverage for all of the candidates left of the line. Now, not only do we have an incredibly close race between the possibly first black and possibly first female candidates, but we also have a growing debacle in the states of Florida and Michigan.
If your head has been under a rock for the past few months, Florida and Michigan did not have their votes counted due to a decree made by the DNC (Democratic National Committee). They, the states, were being punished because they violated party rules and scheduled their primaries too early. Since the stakes are ever so high, this ruling is being scrutinized by many in the political arena. Howard Dean, the chair of the DNC, has suggested a mail-in ballot re-vote to fix this circus show (1).
Now that a seemingly fair solution has been identified, Dean can wash his hands of the whole affair, sit back and watch the show. And what a show there will be. The main question that needs to be addressed is how will the DNC pay for this? In an election where both candidates have generated millions of dollars in donations, it will be interesting to see where the funds come from and who thinks they have a chance to gain in this decision. It is almost reminiscent of the recent NBA decision to allow the Miami Heat to replay the last 51.9 seconds of a game they had lost to the Atlanta Hawks due to an erroneous foul out of Shaquille O'neal (2).
Much like that game, changes have occured since the initial vote, the players are different (well sort of because there are only 2 now) and the stakes are higher for those involved. This seems like a complete and total mess because we all know how inept Florida is at any kind of election process, let alone one done completely by mail.
That aside, the bigger piece to this story is the fact that Democrats are going to continue to win the headlines in the pre-general election media battle. Every day will be a new development and every week will be a new celebrity endorsement. The question I have though, is whether or not problems like this one will win the democrats votes in the presidential election or whether these continued dilemmas will cast a poor light over the blue candidates.
Source (1)
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/09/michigan.florida/?iref=mpstoryview
Source (2)
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3282078
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The only negative that can come out of this prolonged stalemate between Obama and Clinton is a divided Democratic Party in November. But, in all honesty, I really don't see that happening. Most Democrats surveyed said that they would vote for the other candidate in the general election, and, further, a potential Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket means voters for each will salvage something from the race and any harsh feelings between the two camps will disappear. So I don't think this so-called "divided party" theory to explain a potential November Democratic defeat carries any real substance.
Having this race go down to the wire will only bring positives I believe, as Democrats across the land are fired up and very engaged in politics right now. People like the horse race aspect to election season, and there has been nothing better since Gore-Bush in 2000. This fascination will carry over into the general election, and can only prove positive for Democratic voters.
Why can't Florida just get it right? And what's Michigan's problem? First order of business for any new president should be to give Florida a dunce cap and put it in the corner.
Pdrez, if the two candidates are neck and neck until the end with no one ahead, there would be a brokered convention. And according to wikipedia... "2008 presidential election
For the 2008 election there has been speculation that the Democratic Party's national convention might be brokered, or at least that the convention may commence without a presumptive nominee.[8] The Republican contest featured four strong candidates right up to Super Tuesday, following which Mitt Romney "suspended" his campaign (despite winning in several states that day) and media sources declared John McCain the presumptive nominee. On March 4, 2008, McCain won primaries in four states, thus giving him more than the 1191 delegates needed to secure the nomination on the first vote; Mike Huckabee dropped out the same day.
For the Democrats a brokered convention is quite possible, as Barack Obama leads Hillary Clinton by a mere 99 delegates and since only 599 possible delegates are left it is mathematically impossible for either candidate to clinch a decisive victory. About one-fifth of the delegates entitled to vote at a Democratic convention are superdelegates who are not bound to support a particular candidate, and fewer than one-half have declared support for either candidate. Also, the longer the primary season goes on without either candidate amassing an insurmountable delegate advantage, the less likely such an advantage will be obtained, because Democratic National Committee rules forbid state Democratic parties from running "winner take all" contests like some of their Republican counterparts do, so the delegates may continue to be split relatively evenly between the rival candidates.
This means that should the primary season fail to yield either candidate enough pledged delegates to ensure their nomination once combined with known superdelegate support, then the Democrats could enter their convention with uncertainty as to the identity of the nominee and with the support of uncommitted superdelegates proving decisive. Multiple ballots would be unlikely because the only other candidate with pledged delegates is John Edwards, and with barely 0.5 percent of the total delegates, Edwards would be unlikely to be able to use them to any significant leverage. In addition, under Democratic Party rules, delegates pledged to a candidate may not be mandated to vote for anyone other than that candidate, even if that candidate is no longer running for the nomination. In this example, delegates pledged to John Edwards may not be mandated to vote for anyone other than Edwards, even if Edwards is no longer running for nomination."
Now that Florida has gotten its act together and is formally proposing a re-run of the primary in which Clinton trounced Obama, let's see how much Obama really believes in counting votes and the will of the people and popular vote.
His recent opposition to holding a new primary in Florida is very telling. Does he want people to vote, or does he want to keep people from voting. I say let them vote again.
This whole mess in Florida comes at the dirty hands of the Republican majority in the Florida Legislature. Yes, the Republicans forced the Florida Democratic party to hold its primary when it did. What's worse, the Republicans knew that the Florida Democrat voters could possibly lose their delegates if they forced them to change their primary date.
"Florida Democrats pleaded with the committee for "mercy," saying they were steam-rolled by a Republican majority in the Legislature that was intent on moving the presidential primary to Jan. 29 — even if it meant trampling both party's calendars. Florida Democrats did what they could, but in the end we failed."
So, what do you say, Obama. Should we let the Republicans decide whether Florida delegates are seated at the convention, or will you support a re-run so that the millions of Florida voters' voices will be heard in Denver.
Post a Comment