Given that 24/7 punditry has run out of something new to say the only thing left that could have signifcant impact on the outcome (the part that will not be decided by the will of the people) is will the Michigan and Florida delegation be seated vs. who the Super “D’s” vote for?
Ignoring two (or for that matter any) state full of voters is just more primary nonsense but the fact is those were the rules in place at the beginning. So if they (the Dem central committee) is going to tow the line on the rules then the other nonsense the rules stuck us with is the Super delegates role to overrule the voters if it is not (in their estimation) in the best interests of the party. That’s why they were created after 72 when McGovern got creamed. (And never mind the unanswered Watergate Question of what other shenanigans the Nixon reelection team were up to that might have influenced McGovern’s loss).
Those were the rules before it became a mess…
So I ask these Poll questions:
My choice wasn’t in the poll. I would seat the MI and FL delegates, but all superdelegates should vote their consciences. In my opinion “conscience” includes voting for a candidate they publicly endorsed if they endorsed at all, regardless of state/district winner.
..then it is choice #1. If you toss the rules then all states would be seated and all delegates would have been assigned/apportioned by the state vote.
<
p> At this point I see only those options as enforceable and equitable.
Yeah. I’m going to agree with you on this one. This would have been my choice as well.
Here’s how I think it will play out.
<
p>1. Seat Florida delegation assigned by election result – Obama will prefer to refuse because he didn’t have a presence in Florida, while Clinton did, but he will accept as a package with:
<
p>2. Artificially split Michigan down the middle (50/50) – the option to re-run will be rejected by Clinton, the option to accept the vote as is will be rejected by Obama because voters weren’t given the full range of candidates to vote for. This one & two pairing splits the difference. Everyone is a little unhappy.
<
p>3. Super Delegates will vote as they choose.
Obama will bet on public pressure to force supers to follow the will of their districts – Obama bets on the will of the people to mobilize on his behalf
Clinton will bet on her and Bill’s ability to convince supers to remain loyal to them – Clinton bets on her ability to convince individual supers to vote on her behalf
<
p>But, my guess is that supers will mostly choose to follow the will of their districts (with just a few exceptions) despite heavy lobbying from the Clinton camp because these party “elders” will look beyond this election and decide it’s not worth fracturing the party and leaving 2 more decades of unresolved “issues” for Democrats to overcome by going against the will of the people. This is one of the legacies of Bush v Gore 2000. Republicans can get away with that, Democrats can’t.
<
p>….that would include Deval, Teddy and John ignoring the will of the MA Voters.
<
p>BTW excellent article in the Globe on how this mess got started
<
p>’80s rules reform skews Democrats’ nominee process
<
p>Mostly it comes off like a lot of the party elite didn’t like the voters having a final say in who the nominee was.
Ah, I believe I am correctly quoted as saying “follow the will of their districts” (not states) since I tend to support the smallest unit of population representation. As a resident of rural Hampshire County, we know full well that Boston and our national pols often fails to recognize and properly account for our interests out here in the whole big part of the Commonwealth that exists past 495. Big Dig anyone?
<
p>However, on principle, I agree it will produce some interesting exceptions: Teddy, Deval, Charlie Rangel, John Lewis, Dan Inouye… not that I actually mind seeing anyone is power squirm. Let’s hope that whatever happesn, it remains above board, and let each who excepts go before his or her constituency to explain and be held accountable.
As other people are realizing, is that according to the same DNC rules by which MI and FL are getting punished, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina all bullied their way earlier in the calendar than they were supposed to. Strange how we’re not punishing them.
<
p>Until I see Obama people rending their garments over the unfairness of seating those delegates, I can’t take them seriously. Either all six states sit, or none of them.