The "rules are rules" argument for not seating Michigan (and Florida) delegates at the Democratic National Convention seems at odds with another argument also reverberating around political circles -- the "we should get rid of superdelegates" argument.
In the first case, the argument goes as laid out in Daily Kos, the rules should not be broken. Therefore, Michigan delegates can't be seated. In the other case, the argument continues, rules must be broken. The party must prevent superdelegates (who have been part of the nominating process since 1982) from having a say in the nomination.
Both of these arguments, if adopted, would appear to favor Sen. Barack Obama over Sen. Hillary Clinton. But it's hard for Obama to have it both ways -- stick to the rules and bar Michigan and Florida delegates but break the rules and not count superdelegates. (See Obama's comments on superdelegates here at Talking Points Memo TV.)
Such an argument puts him in an uncomfortable position. How does he plan to carry Michigan and Florida in November after dissing our delegates? Clinton's position on the two rules cases (the opposite of Obama's) is also inconsistent but is less insulting to the state, since a majority of those who turned out for the primary did vote for her.
Former Vice President Al Gore is standing by to negotiate a way out. If he finds a solution, he deserves another Nobel Peace Prize.
3 comments:
I follow you -- it is inconsistent to argue that the superdelegates should not vote. But it seems to me a realistic expectation that they should follow the will of the people they represent, and to put that pressure on them seems appropriate.
I'm with you up until this part, which I've heard before and has bothered me: "How does he plan to carry Michigan and Florida in November after dissing our delegates?"
Um... his policies? Do we really think Michigan voters are so spiteful that they'd choose a dinosaur like McCain over either Clinton or Obama out of spite? I don't think so.
-Anonymous Liberal
Unfortunately, people may tune him out and never hear what his policies are. Democrats may not vote for McCain, but a lot of independents might. And some Democrats might just not bother to vote. Others may not give their all -- the door-knocking, phone-calling, and organizing that we need to do to win elections. Everytime he campaigned in the state, the media would mention that he stood in the way of seating Michigan's delegates. The issue would never go away.
Seems to me that interest and turnout are so high and the sentiment to kick out Bush and his ilk so strong that whatever perceived slight the nominee made against MI (or more accurately, Mark Brewer, who should be ousted) would be quickly forgotten in the general election.
-AL
Post a Comment