A SoapBlox Politics Blog
[Mobile Edition]
About
- About Us
- Email Us (news/tips)
- Editorial Policy
- Posting Guidelines
- Advertise Here
- Buy Michlib Merchandise
RSS
Feedburner

Subscribe to Michlib daily email summary. (Preview)
Enter address:

Donate
Become a sponsor and support our work.

 MichLib sponsor list

Michigan Political Blog Ad Network

Advertise Liberally

50 State Ad Network

Liberal Feed Network

Latest hand-selected Michigan political news and analysis headlines

Can somebody explain to me why Michigan's fiasco can't cause a national train wreck?

by: Grebner

Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 00:59:15 AM EST


 Of course, we may get lucky, but that's not really "a plan".  With Clinton bouncing back tonight in NH, it's plausible that she and Obama will go round after round, with neither scoring a knockout. 

 Imagine next that Michigan's "primary" results in a Clinton landslide on January 15, caused mainly because the opposition will be confused and splintered by the available options.  I don't know whether that will happen, but it may.

 The consequence might be that Michigan's would-be delegation would prove critical to forming a majority.  Not at the Convention, most likely, but during the wheeling and dealing phase that leads up to it, as the two sides struggle to assemble a majority.

 If this comes to pass, the fight will be between Clinton's effort to seat Michigan, and Obama's struggle to uphold the DNC sanctions.  One side extending pseudo-grace and forgiveness to our transgressions, while the other side asks in pseudo-good-faith, why he should be punished for complying with the DNC's rules and following their instructions.  I suppose any fight would would involve a recommendation by the Rules Committee to reverse the already imposed sanctions, probably also affecting the status of Florida.

 I won't develop this fantasy any further - it might play out in many different ways, most of which wouldn't cause an actual disaster.  In the same way that the probability Nader would divert enough votes in a marginal state to let the Republicans steal the election was - well - miniscule.  Or deferring track maintenance only rarely causes derailments, and most of those aren't all that serious.  Practically not worth worrying about - unless it happens, of course.

 My question is:  is there some reason this can't happen?  Are we reduced to hoping the train won't leave the track?  That the matter is decided without reference to our delegation?

 I always feel the first job of managers is to anticipate and avoid outright disaster.  Fine-tuning the operations and innovating are good, but they come after survival.  Is there something else between us and disaster, besides Mark Brewer's lucky streak?

Grebner :: Can somebody explain to me why Michigan's fiasco can't cause a national train wreck?
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Well, I'm doing my part... (4.00 / 1)
... to ensure a Hillary lock in Michigan, delegates or no!



-- Signature! --


I have written about just this scenario, here and elsewhere, (4.00 / 1)
quite a number of times, and got very little reaction to it other than "Oh, OF COURSE it will all be settled by Super Tuesday". I've felt like I was shouting into an empty room.

What if it IS NOT settled? Either decision the DNC made in such a situation - to seat or not to seat - would shred this party from top to bottom, and consign us to defeat in the fall.

And I've made exactly the same point you do at the end - why couldn't our state leaders see this possibility - and why did it not weigh more heavily in their considerations than this ultimately futile attempt to gain more influence for Michigan?

So, how about it, primary fans? What could possibly compensate for the remotest chance of handing the White House over for another four years? And given that - in fact - we have NO compensation whatsoever for the terrible risk involved in this maneuver, what does that say about those who have led us into this morass?

Well?

By the way, I was down at our local headquarters, watching the NH returns, and our county chair was taking call after call (this in the evening! about 9:30) blistering the poor guy up and down for the fact that the callers could not vote for their preferred candidate, a fact he quite obviously has no control over. This has been going on for about a week now and is accelerating. Let's have another chorus of ("Well, you should tell them to blame the candidates who withdrew") Get a clue - THEY DON'T. They blame - THE DEMOCRATS. We  have dug ourselves a deep hole with these voters we may never climb out of.


An on-topic comment from Moi. (4.00 / 2)
It's fun to imagine that somehow, someway, Michigan will be the catalyst for the "final battleground!" for the Presidency.

We all have State Pride like that.  "We'll matter the MOST in the end!  The Democratic Party will be torn asunder!  Michigan and Florida are swing states BEFORE the swing!"

Won't happen.  You're talking 200 or so delegates out of over 3000.  And you have 22 States after Super-Tuesday, by when the victor should be pretty clearly identified, even if #2 holds in strong.

It's just a fantasy.

-- Signature! --


More of the same. (sigh) (4.00 / 1)
Believe me  - it is not pride I am feeling right now.

[ Parent ]
Exactly - there's only a small chance. (0.00 / 0)
But since Florida's delegation is also in play, and there's some chance that Edwards will be able to rally in the South and pick up a few, the chance the delegate count will top out somewhere like 48% to 44% can't be set at exactly zero.

For that matter, the chance that a hurricane would both attain Category 5, and also hit New Orleans squarely, wasn't very large either - hadn't happened in at least 150 years.  The Levee Boards had more important things to do than inspect and fix - they were busy with real estate development and such.

I'm glad to hear you share Brewer's confidence.


[ Parent ]
By you own logic (4.00 / 2)
Edward's will be the king maker...not Michigan.

If he continues to pull in 20% and stays through Super Tuesday, he can be the king-maker at the convention.

It is more likely that the Republicans will be "torn apart" quite frankly.

Anyone of our four front-runners would be an excellent president, and I think the fact that we have a competitive primary now will give us a much stronger candidate as a result.


[ Parent ]
A question on uncommitted (4.00 / 1)
Here is my problem.  I am not in love with any of our candidates.  If all names were on our ballot, then I would probably vote for Edwards.  Since he took that opportunity away from me, his campaign is telling me to vote uncommitted.

This is the problem.  Obama is my least favorite of the three front runners.  I think that if he is the nominee, then we will lose in the fall.  My vote will not include a roseta stone that explains my particular "uncommitted" means Edwards and not Obama.  So, won't my uncommitted vote be spun for Obama since Edwards is now lagging?

Although I am a bit surprised, I think I now will be voting for HRC next Tuesday.  I voted for Brown in the '92 primary, and I voted Green Party in '96 and '00 November elections.  Not a big Clinton fan, but here I am.  Any thoughts?  


Voting for the least repulsive... (4.00 / 3)
candidate seems to be a more and more popular option.  That is why Bush was elected in 2000  --- to a few too many voters, Nader seemed less repulsive than either Gore or Bush. All it took was for him to shave off  few votes for Gore and look where we are. (Of course Nader, whose ego is a large as Dubya's doesn't admit to making a mistake either.)

I think this speaks to a failure of the system--the best candidates really don't want to put up with the BS and don't enter the race.  So we end up with a bunch of second and third tier wannabes.

But I do think that the Democrats will nominate someone who is unelectable, even considering the last 8 years, so maybe everyone should try to get the least repulsive Republican nominated!


[ Parent ]
Voting uncommitted (4.00 / 2)
means you need to get your Butt to the District convention in March and vote for the Edwards people to fill those slots.

But the truth is, that we will have a clear candidate come the Convention and all the delegates will vote for the nominee anyway...so the point is mute, other than to influence the media narrative going into Super Tuesday.


[ Parent ]
There is the possiblity that (4.00 / 2)
if we go into the convention without a clear winner, we could see a brokered convention.  I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing (especially since I think there is a decent chance that it might end with Al Gore getting the nomination)

And given whats happening on the Rs side, I wouldn't rule it out for them either.

My 2 cents


Gore (4.00 / 1)
That would be sweet!  I don't see it happening, but by August we might be so tired of the current crop of candidates that Al Gore would be a breath of fresh air.

[ Parent ]
DNC's Fiasco (4.00 / 2)
This is the DNC's fiasco, not Michigan's.  It's the DNC that voted to allow Iowa and New Hampshire to go first yet again.  It's the DNC that voted to strip Michigan and Florida of all their delegates.  It's supporters of the DNC's decision that have lost their attempts to cancel the Michigan primary at both the state and federal level.

I've asked the question several times about how the DNC can justify Iowa and New Hampshire going first.  The only answer I've received on this blog is, "it's tradition".  That's not a liberal answer.  I get the sense that other than the list and cost issues, the anger toward Michigan holding an early primary is that we were the ones that stepped forward to force change rather than letting some other state do it.  I'm personally proud of that fact.

This isn't Michigan's problem anymore.  We've made our decision and the primary is going ahead.  The DNC's got a tough decision to make.  They'd be better off backing down now, rather than later.  Either way they've got problems.  The Republicans in D.C. were a lot smarter in how they've handled this than the DNC.


Given that the selection of a presidential candidate (4.00 / 1)
is a national issue, and not something that belongs to a single state...

It was up to the DNC to determine the process for selection, they did, we signed off...

And then we decided to tell the to fuck off...they responded in kind.


[ Parent ]
They Responded in Kind (4.00 / 1)
But in the end, the DNC has put itself in a lose-lose position.  Brewer and Levin were just on the radio basically saying what I've been saying on this blog all along.

Dingell and Brewer outmaneuvered Dean & the DNC.
 


[ Parent ]
How? (4.00 / 1)
By making our primary useless, giving the Republicans a free tax payer voter list and pissing off the rest of the nation (except the red neck Floridians who olny moved up to keep the off color people from influencing the nomination)?

Real rocket scientist we have here...

I am surprised they can tie their own shoes without swallowing their own tongues.


[ Parent ]

Features
Politics & Elections Library:
- US Senate
- US House
- Executive Branch
- Michigan Senate
- Michigan House
- State Supreme Court
- Ed Boards
- Michigan Media
- MI Campaign Training
- MI Political Job Postings

Special Sections:
- Technical Politics - Grebner
- Better know a (Senate Republican) obstructionist
- Fiscal Sanity
- Michigan's Fallen
Search
Progressive Blogroll
For MI Bloggers:
- MI Bloggers Facebook
- MI Bloggers Myspace
- MI Bloggers PartyBuilder
- MI Bloggers Wiki

Statewide:
- Blogging for Michigan
- Call of the Senate Dems
- [Con]serving Michigan (Michigan LCV)
- DailyKos (Michigan tag)
- Enviro-Mich List Serve archives
- Democratic Underground, Michigan Forum
- Jack Lessenberry
- JenniferGranholm.com
- LeftyBlogs (Michigan)
- Michigan Coalition for Progress
- Michigan Messenger
- MI Idea (Michigan Equality)
- Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan
- Rainbow Mittens
- The Upper Hand (Progress Michigan)

Upper Peninsula:
- Keweenaw Now
- Save the Wild UP

Western Michigan:
- Great Lakes Guy
- Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott
- Mostly Sunny with a Chance of Gay
- Public Pulse
- West Michigan Politics
- West Michigan Rising
- Windmillin'

Mid-Michigan:
- Among the Trees
- Blue Chips (CMU College Democrats Blog)
- Christine Barry
- Conservative Media
- Far Left Field
- Graham Davis
- Honest Errors
- ICDP:Dispatch (Isabella County Democratic Party Blog)
- Liberal, Loud and Proud
- Livingston County Democratic Party Blog
- MI Blog
- Mid-Michigan DFA
- Pohlitics
- Random Ramblings of a Somewhat Common Man
- Waffles of Compromise
- YAF Watch

Flint/Bay Area/Thumb:
- Bay County Democratic Party
- Blue November
- East Michigan Blue
- Genesee County Young Democrats
- Greed, Eggs, and Ham
- Jim Stamas Watch
- Meddling Outsider
- Saginaw County Democratic Party Blog
- Stone Soup Musings
- Voice of Mordor

Southeast Michigan:
- A2Politico
- arblogger
- Arbor Update
- Congressman John Conyers (CD14)
- Mayor Craig Covey
- Councilman Ron Suarez
- Democracy for Metro Detroit
- Detroit Skeptic
- Detroit Uncovered (formerly "Fire Jerry Oliver")
- Grosse Pointe Democrats
- I Wish This Blog Was Louder
- Kicking Ass Ann Arbor (UM College Democrats Blog)
- LJ's Blogorific
- Mark Maynard
- Michigan Progress
- Motor City Liberal
- North Oakland Dems
- Oakland Democratic Politics
- Our Michigan
- Peters for Congress (CD09)
- PhiKapBlog
- Polygon, the Dancing Bear
- Rust Belt Blues
- Third City
- Thunder Down Country
- Trusty Getto
- Unhinged

MI Congressional
District Watch Blogs:
- Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood (CD08)

MI Campaigns:
MI Democratic Orgs:
MI Progressive Orgs:
MI Misc.:
National Alternative Media:
National Blogs:
Powered by: SoapBlox