The sky isn't falling (yet)

I Strongly Disagree (0.00 / 0)

If this was a competitive primary, it would be a different story.  But Clinton is polling double what Obama is in Michigan and four times what Edward's is.  Both Edwards and Obama are losing ground fast.  Hillary has already crossed the 50% mark in one national poll and appears likely to win Iowa.  While I agree that Brewer won't make a final decision until November 14, it's clear that Democrats are already solidifying behind Clinton -both the leadership and the Democratic base.  Whether the DNR backs down or not is a non-issue.  Clinton will be the candidate next year.  Of course, we know they won't back down and risk angering Democrats in two very important states for the party.

Regardless of what happens with Michigan's delegates next year, Brewer & Dingel are the clear winners and the DNR is the loser.  The DNC idea that Iowa and New Hampshire should always come first is indefensible.  The fact that some of the candidates would give up Michigan in order to increase their chances in those states should drive any of their remaining supporters toward the candidates that stick with us.

Let's stick with Michigan's January 15 Primary until the DNC comes up with a more equitable system such as rotating regional primaries.  The MRP isn't caving in to the RNC, so why should we cave to the DNC?

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 04:09:51 AM UTC

why should we forefit our local gains? (4.00 / 3)

just for some perceived influence? 

also, primary polling is bad at it's best, and it's usually much worse that that.

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 04:16:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

We're getting penaltied as well (0.00 / 0)

But we're still going for it anyway. Damn the torpedos. Momentum is the key. Look at Dean/Kerry in 2004. That changed everything with the primaries.

Two differences. Our penalty in numbers may be 1/2 instead of all, an the candidates still are campaigning here. I don't know if the RNC is putting the screws to Saul like DNC is to Brewer on this, but it just flat out amazes me what the candidates are doing outside of Hillary and Gravel. The Upper Midwest still decides elections. Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and if you want to stretch the definition of midwest, throw West Virginia and Western Pennsylvania in there.

From a partisan side, this really makes it interesting. The snub could help is in November, but at the same time possibly hurt our primary badly. Winners here are Giuliani with cultural liberals, Ron Paul with anti-war voters, and maybe Duncan Hunter or Mike Huckabee with union members.

I'd like to see some primary reforms overall (Rotating regional system). I'm usually no fan of the feds taking over on anything, but unless things change on this, we'll be voting before Christmas if not this year, by 2012.

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

---

by: Republican Michigander @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 12:31:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rotating Regional Primaries (0.00 / 0)

I agree that regional primaries are the way to go.  Five regions streched over a 10 week period would make sense, although I'd suggest a drawing rather than a rotation given that elections only come every 4 years.

Of coruse, I think the idea that Republicans are going to see gains in Michigan because Obama, Edwards and Richardson dropped out is a fantasy of conservatives.  All it did was lock in Clinton's control of Michigan.  To think that the DNC wouldn't seat Michigan's Clinton delegates when she will clearly be the nominee is silly.  Michigan is a big blue state and becoming bluer every year.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 12:43:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

here's the thing, (4.00 / 1)

supporters of edwards/obama/richardson would pull for the eventual nominee and the entire downticket crowd as long as they thought their candidate got a fair shot.  What we see here is a state party that is too stubborn to allow that (at least initially).  These diehard supporters are crucial to any campaign, and I doubt the state is willing to risk even a fraction of them to disillusionment.

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 12:49:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A fair shot? (0.00 / 0)

There is no good reason that Obama, Edwards and Richardson couldn't remain in the primary.  Hillary & Dodd have agreed to stay in along with all the Republican.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:18:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

there's also no good reason to not switch to a caucus (4.00 / 1)

the ball is in brewers court now

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:47:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

January (0.00 / 0)

Agreed.  Caucus or primary, I don't care.  As long as it's in January and Michigan isn't backing down to the DNC who feels Iowa and New Hampshire are more important or accomodating candidates who feel they can write off Michigan.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:51:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"agreed to stay in" (0.00 / 0)

Clinton isn't actively campaigning here -- she just agreed to keep her name on the ballot.

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:49:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actively Campaiging (0.00 / 0)

I think her decision yesterday to remain in the primary is brilliant campaigning.  Overnight, she's gained the support of large number of Michigan Democrats who were previously on the fence.  She's also been able to counter the Republican claims that national Democrats don't care about Michigan.  Hillary's poll numbers have been rather stable in Michigan the past six months.  I imagine we'll see a big boost in the next few polls.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:54:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Did you really just use polling #s for Iowa? (0.00 / 0)

Remember Howard Dean in Iowa in 2004?

Success is not final, failure is not fatal. - Winston Churchill  

---

by: TJarrell @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 04:37:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Howard Dean 2004 (0.00 / 0)

No, but I remember Howard Dean in Iowa in the summer of 2003.  By 2004, Howard Dean was off the map.  Clinton, on the other hand, has been widening her lead going into the fall in a year when the primaries are earlier than ever.  Her negetives are dropping and her fundraising lead is growing.  If you want to compare Howard Dean to anyone, look at Obama.  His campaign peaked this summer.  He is the inspirational candidate that the media adored.  But that is fading now.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 12:38:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Interesting analysis (0.00 / 0)

  Thx!

---

by: David Boyle @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 04:33:38 AM UTC

The "Deserters" should be persona non grata (4.00 / 2)

We learned a huge lesson about the characters of these chumps.  They are doing what Democrats have been known for, being wooses (sp?).  They all know they can't win without Iowa so they appeal to that one half of one percent of New Hampshire and Iowa voters who care that the candidates are on the Michigan ballot. 

Biden was the most arrogant, calling the Michigan Primary a beauty contest.  What a jerk.  And Bonior's comments suggests that only Iowa and New Hampshire residents are capable of thoughtful reflection on the candidates. 

Hillary won Michigan yesterday and if these guys show up here tar and feather them and put a pacifier in their mouths!!!

I hope that Mark Brewer does not schedule a caucus which will cost the party money we will need in November.

---

by: crimlawpro @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 11:29:21 AM UTC

biden was right though (4.00 / 2)

our delegates wouldn't have been seated according to dnc rules, and now they certainly won't be.

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 12:51:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Michgan's Delegates Will Be Seated (0.00 / 0)

With Hillary as the clear nominee, the DNC won't refuse to seat Michigan's delegates next summer and risk alienating voters in a big blue state.  This will be long after the primary season is over.  The DNC today, is making the threats to avoid alienating Dem voters in traditional early primary states.  They'll be politically pragmatic and change their position next spring.  Hopefully, what is happening this year will spur some reform and we'll have staggered regional primaries that are fair to all states.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:24:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bottom Line (0.00 / 0)

The bottom line is that unless someone can come up with a good reason why Iowa and New Hampshire always should go first, in the absence of a fair national system, states like Michigan and Florida should have every right to select their own primary dates.  I will stick with the decision made by the Michigan legislature, Governor Granholm, Mark Brewer and the Michigan Democratic Party to have a January 15 primary and support the candidates who support Michigan.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:39:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

DNC looking at 500+ electoral votes? (4.00 / 1)

When did Marion Barry take over the DNC?  No rational person can believe that.  Name the last Democratic president that lost Michigan.  Name the last Dem candidate that kept it close in a losing effort, and lost Michigan.  If the DNC is honestly that stupid, then its time for a third party.

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 12:54:28 PM UTC

strange times we live in, (0.00 / 0)

with this sorry lot of goopers, i'd be surprised if they managed to take a single state.

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 13:49:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'd love it, but (0.00 / 0)

After nominations are made, things will tighten up.  I don't see a reverse Reagan/Mondale happpening.  If its Hilliary (and I think it will be), there will be a dedicated opposition to her.  If think we win, but it will be in the 50s; and we may not break into any southern state.  Gore failed to carry a southern state.  The inherent racism/misogyny of southern voters will be difficult to get past.

The upside however is that we can finally kill that myth that we need a southern candidate to win the White House.  Winning the White House with a Midwest/Northeast block also benefits the kind of Democratic Party that I prefer.  A little more emphasis on labor, a little more scepticism of Big Corp., and a longer tradition of an educated, civil society.

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 14:25:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree with your arguments, (0.00 / 0)

just not your conclusions, aside from the midwest/northeast(/westcoast) block doing well for the democratic party.

southern voters may me inherently racist/misogynistic, but that won't help the gop nominee if he is a mormon.

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 15:06:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fair point (0.00 / 0)

If either Romney or Guilliani make it, then the southern evangelicals are in a tough place.  But if its Huckabee ...

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 18:58:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hold firm our position (4.00 / 1)

I am for holding our ground.  Why wasn't New Hampshire penalized for moving forward.  They moved first.  The Republican candidates are not treating their party so unkindly.  What up with this?
If our votes don't matter to them lets take the time to show how Michigan SHOULD matter to them.
Senator Chris Dodd is an excellent candidate and needs to be considered.

---

by: ebba debba @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 14:19:09 PM UTC

Question (0.00 / 0)

Just out of curiousity, why do you think Brewer is an Edwards supporter?  I would be more inclined to believe him a Clinton supporter for the simple reason it appears many of the other cogs in higher levels of the machine support her.

Julie--a small cog in the bottom of the machine

To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 17:29:05 PM UTC

Brewer is uaw/macomb person (4.00 / 1)

edwards is a union person, his campaign manager is david bonior, a uaw/macomb person.  old friendships tend to last.

---

by: Jon K @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 20:29:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Feel like contacting the MDP? (4.00 / 1)

Here's the MDP's contact page.

Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott

---

by: ScottyUrb @ Thu Oct 11, 2007 at 02:59:58 AM UTC