Jerome has a good post about Obama strategy to deny MI & FL. It is also interesting to read the reactions of local bloggers in MI and FL.

I don’t think the Obama camp is thinking about how this affects the general election.

I’m honestly confused as to why someone would try to “win” the nomination at the (likely) expense of the GE. What is going on?

This is the DNC’s fault for gaming the system for Obama—gambling on the GE by singling out MI and FL for unfair punishment—and Obama’s fault (in MI) for taking his damn name off the ballot. Of course, in the eyes of the media and most people it looks to be the workings of that dastardly Hitlery caricature (*cue maniacal cackle*).

Personally, I want FL to be seated as is and MI to be redone as a primary (including firehouse option), paid for by the rest of us—not poor MI.* No caucuses, no web voting (ripe for mischief).

According to the AP, here are the likely $ numbers:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5igrYL…
MI:
Primary: $8-$12M (includes voting by mail or over the web)
FL:
Primary: $22-$24M
Vote-by-mail: at least $8M

*A FL primary takes months of planning that I doubt they have and unless we can assure the state Democratic party we’ll cover all the expenses, it’ll hurt their local contests financially. I’m a little worried about a pure vote by mail option, but if push comes to shove, that may be the best option if FL is a must re-do.

and this is masterful, in every sense of the word. Perfect timing, a couple of weeks ago as a suggestion it would have seemed desperate, a couple of weeks on and the issue might already be decided.

Obama can’t do anything now but go along with a ballot vote, the last thing he wants because he’ll lose them both. If he refuses he looks petty and childish and the Clinton camp will just pound him to pieces, but by going along he is forced to follow Hillary’s lead and appear to be the weaker of the two, the follower instead of the one with solutions; and to top it off he loses both key GE states for his big finale.

This approach gets the DNC and the Credentials committee off the hook, a powerful incentive for them to get behind it, and lets the state committees off honorably so they will get behind it too. Obama and Brazile (Chair of the DNC’s Voting Rights Institute!!!) will only look worse and worse the longer they refuse, and are doomed whether they agree or fight.

Absolutely masterful. James Carville for Secretary of State.

obvious reasons why:

-other states don’t get a do-over. why shouldn’t they? with just as twisted “logic,” i could argue that some votes had “flaws” and should have revotes.
but that’s “crazy” and “radical.” but it’s not in the case of FL and MI?

-it’s never a good thing for private money to fund “public” elections, rich people buying elections is almost always a sign of lack of democracy.

- what about crossover dems? MI at least is/was an open primary state. shall those who voted republican in the “original” primary be banned, even if they’re likely dem voters in the fall? some of us cast “fuck with republicans” primary votes with no intention of staying with that party in the general.

-the whole fracking point, for which MI was prepared to suffer, according to the preexisting rules that subsequently got nullified is that MI (and FL) wanted a say when there were more than two candidates on the ballot and the “buzz” still allowed for any of the “majors” to be the eventual nom. voting now, after everyone else’s say has actually been counted and matters is as satisfying as bacon made from rice.

- what the hell is wrong with a fight at the convention? nothing, that’s what. there’s blame to go around plenty, the DNC, Dean, the MIDNC and FL leg, republicans, voters…at this point, no one has clean hands.

finally: open this pandora’s box of “revoting,” and you close the door on real democracy forever. that probably shut in 2000, but just in case a majority of people still believe in the “integrity of elections,” this must not occur.

does anyone else find it ironic that the republicans can sit back and watch while democrats tear apart the last shreds of decency clinging to the rape victim that is our voting process? how they must laugh and laugh…

think about it: “revote” shouldn’t even be in our vocabular. unless we admire those states with long practice in it.

Even if we do right with FL, MI we’ll still have to deal with this propaganda at the convention (highly popular, believed by many):
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/0…
Hillary Clinton, Fratricidal Maniac
The New Republic: Hillary Clinton’s Continued Run Is Damaging The Democrats’ Chances

The projection and lack of basic critical thinking skills is truly mind-boggling. If one applied his rationality equally re: Clinton undermining Obama in the GE, both Obama and Biden would be blasted for undermining Clinton and Obama, respectively: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/0…

I fear we’ve gone past a tipping point here.

Isn’t the alternative to seat these delegations after the candidate is decided? Or else have a hideous credentials fight? And then lose both in the general?

I can see all the reasons why this isn’t a good idea (especially the private funding point), but that doesn’t mean that this idea isn’t the best, given the alternatives. Eh?

Half a loaf, and all that.

Finally, to me the key, 30,000 feet-level idea is to legitimate the result. No matter who wins, I don’t see how you can call the results legitimate without the voters of OH and MI speaking, despite all the DNC arcana. (And I’m arguing against interest, here, because Hillary got the most votes in Florida, without campaigning. If I were a raw advocate, I’d argue for seating FL, period, as some have done.) The caucus system is hideous enough.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Fair went by the boards some time ago; we are now into power politics, pure and simple. I’m all for democracy and such, but this is not the general election - it is a primary, you know, where the party selects the candidate. Read the party rules; fair is down the list, holding power is real high, and that’s the way it is. Fair is what you can expect in the general - you won’t always get it, but you can expect it.

As to private financing of primaries, that law allows it; change the law if it doesn’t suit, but for now it is “fair.”

About that screw-’em vote in the Republican primary, this is probably not the right moment to say I told you so, so I won’t, but I did. Mmm, mmm. A vote cast in anger and all that. Mmm, mmm mmm.

My view, this mess was made by FL and MI so they need to clean it up the best they can. If the campaigns can raise the money and turn it over to the state parties, fine. The sooner this gets sorted the better, even if the convention will still be a battle.

Masterful move on Carville’s part. Whether you like him or not or agree with the outcome, a masterful political move.

True, Lambert. You’re right, it would be best to re-do primaries in both states with full-on campaigning; my only concerns with regards to Florida is money and time (Can they actually pull it off?). Besides, what better way for HRC to shut up the OFB?

How to respond to people who feel its justified, because, you know, that’s just how it’s done?

As a Michigan voter, I didn’t vote in the primary because

1) the Party said it wouldn’t count
2) my candidate wasn’t on the ballot
3) it appeared like Clinton was gaming the system, since a lot of the people that pushed the early primary forward in the state seemed to be Clinton supporters.

Basically, the behavior of the Democrats has earned them the worst epithet I have for them: Democrats In Name Only.

People can damn Lord Eschaton and Lady Avedon for failing to come down on any side in the Clintonista-Oborg power struggle. I heartily agree with them. But I’m just a lowly C-lister, no? The Democratic party is the only hope we have of breaking the NeoCon-TheoCon rape of the Constitution in this country.

So the Unibama is mucking things up good, obfuscating the line between the Left and the Right, equivocating on everything from social security to the role of religion in government. But if you can’t see the damage HHHillary McClinton has done and continues to do to the progressive movement, the Democratic Party, and her Nation, you really aren’t paying attention.

Oh: and it’s none of my business, but I wouldn’t patronize CD’s idealism. Just sayin’.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

hokay.

Isn’t the alternative to seat these delegations after the candidate is decided? Or else have a hideous credentials fight? And then lose both in the general?

we get all that and more either way, any way, anyway. the process is fucked, has been for a long time, it’s only now that a bunch of loosers are running things that they got sloppy and let it all hang out for the rabble to perceive.

glad you heard the part about “some rich folks buying another vote.” we’re all clear on how that’s bad, right?

and again- what “choice” are you talking about? the SCLM decided, named, groomed, lauded, feted, castigated, hamstrung, and otherwise fellated/sodomized the various dem “choices” and came up with this: the hilbama creature. one is up, the other is down, one is good, the other is bad, there are many long weeks to go, yin and yang are ever in motion. the narrative sells, so it must be “real.”

our guy finished second in the nation’s “most important early race” and thence passed into invisible infinity, so far as “the voters” were told. you just can’t expect me to get emotionally excited about a “revote” at this point. why not bring in some clowns? maybe a band, or some strippers? we’d have more fun.

and: i’m not a fucking idealist, BIO. or rather, perhaps i am but that hardly matters here. (you want practical? git yer ass busy planning the strategy to fix this mess by 2016- the absolute soonest national change can be implemented according to progressive standards) why are democratic citizens of a republic talking about a ’revote?’ i just want to start there. i fucking live here, i always vote and i did vote this time. you’d think if anyone wanted to understand “what the voters want” they’d listen to people like kelley and me. yes, there are partisans who think this is a good idea. the voters here in this state? don’t make me laugh. start there and you understand what an abortion of democracy this really is.

meanwhile: how much time has everyone spent analyzing the fact that according the the FEC, McStain is out of money until much closer to the election? i’ve been too busy to do the proper research, but that seems like a good starting point. things that make you go, hmmm.

I will just use this space to clean up some odds and ends before going to another related thread and re-approach the apparently “core” question.

CD: About “idealist.” Had no idea it could be offensive, nothing wrong with idealism per se, and perhaps I’m missing something but it seemed clear to me that asking for fairness was what you were doing and, in the context of the primary process, that strikes me as idealistic. Maybe not. On the other hand you say this: “i’m not a fucking idealist, BIO. or rather, perhaps i am but that hardly matters here.” so perhaps or not, but in any event the worst I was for certain was irrelevant - sort of. Sorry about that, I guess; no offense was intended.

Then this: (you want practical? git yer ass busy planning the strategy to fix this mess by 2016- the absolute soonest national change can be implemented according to progressive standards) Indeed so. It is just what I’ve been talking about here since my very first comment, which was that getting all torqued about slow progress was an extravagant expenditure of energy that would be better spent working on the long haul that it will take to turn the country around. 2016 is the earliest that will likely happen, all things considered, although if things go swimmingly well we could see substantial progressive change starting by 2013, after the next presidential election. Do you recall the response here when I put that proposition out? Universal castigation. So pleased to see we’re now in agreement; that makes two of us.

Plan? First step, 2008: elect a Democrat – any Democrat – president; increase margins in House and Senate, goal 55 Democrats. Second step, 2010: push new round of progressive candidates across all House districts, no matter who is in office; this will push everyone to the Left, whether many new progressives are elected or not. As for 2012: I’ll get back to you in, say early 2011 and see how things are going.

The first step is key, without it there will be no second step, so for just the next 8 months that has to be the sole focus; nothing else matters. What ever you see as your best contribution to achieving that, charge in and thank you for your contribution.

KB. About this: “Oh: and it’s none of my business, but I wouldn’t patronize CD’s idealism. Just sayin’.” Thanks for the warning, now let’s agree – it’s none of your business. CD and I are all grown up and able to deal with each other directly, so instead of playing “let’s the two of you fight” just butt out. Thanks in advance.

Good heavens! And I thought I could rant:

Finally, and this is the nail in the coffin, James Carville pulls the ultimate gotcha on live TV. Read the exchange between Carville and David Wilhelm on Wolf Blitzer’s show this AM. (Transcript here on Taylor Marsh.) Basically, Carville says HRC will put $15 million of her own money up to pay for new primaries in Florida and Michigan, since both the states and the DNC say they would like to do so but can’t afford the cost. Will Obama raise $15 million in matching funds from his own vaunted money machine and give the voters of these states a legitimate, sanctioned, no-equivocations primary voting opportunity?

The Hillary campaign hit this one out of the ballpark and into the next county. The rock and hard place of the VP suggestion just became a lady or tiger situation. Obama cannot afford to be seen losing big states again to HRC (and he will lose MI and FL), but now he is the person in the position of preventing those votes from being cast. If he stonewalls the votes, the fury of HRC supporters at the convention will be epic and they will demand that FL and MI be seated as is. If he can bully the credentials committee into any solution other than seating as-is, he will lose all legitimacy with HRC supporters, who will either write her in, vote McCain or stay home in November.

Any claim he tries to make about how pledged delegates represent the will of the people is DOA now. Between the circus of the Texas Two-step and Obama’s refusal to even allow MI and FL primaries to take place, he cannot maintain the claim to be the popular choice. How can his Texas caucus votes be more legitimate than Hillary’s Texas primary votes? Moreover, he looks like he’s afraid to put his money where his campaign rhetoric is and stand up to a vote.

What all of this points to, however, is one of the deep, negative themes that has been present in his campaign from the beginning, that people who do not support him are not legitimate voters and their opinions should count for nothing. People who vote for Hillary are Archie Bunkers, “low information” people who vote for “monsters” and who need to be shoved around, harangued, locked out of polling places. They will simply fall into line after he is nominated and support him, of course, but his high-minded followers cannot be asked to stoop to support anyone else.

Hillary supporters are accused of being racists, of being war-mongers, of not understanding just what a heinous human being she really is, of being stupid, old, uneducated yahoo bitches. Their dissenting opinions about key events and policy decisions (what these acts and policies mean, how they relate to each other, how important they are on their own and in relation to other acts and policies) are scorned and attacked.

The root cause of Obama’s loss of electoral legitimacy is his campaign’s refusal to accept that he might, very legitimately, not be the nominee.

Ouch!

But let’s be reasonable, here, people. I’m heading for the ice floes with a couple of cans of dog food anyhow — how could my views by legitimate?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.