Where's The Influence?

couldn't agree with you more (4.00 / 1)

at least on the democratic side, the intended effect of the primary wasn't achieved.  therefore, it was a failure.

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 13:52:39 PM CST

As compared to what? (4.00 / 2)

How are we less influential than we have been in the past?  I agree that what we did was a mess, but it seems to me that the only fair comparison is between what we had this year and what we have had in the past.  We can't reasonably compare yesterday with an idealized, impossible scenario.

I have said it before: I have never cast a meaningful vote in a presidential primary/caucus in my entire life.  So, yesterday's vote represents the status quo for me.  Hell (which I tell my kids is a place and not a swear word), in 2004, I did the early voting, and since Edwards bailed out on me before our actual caucus, my early vote for him was wasted.

And to take a wider view, Iowa and New Hampshire get nothing for their early status.  No special spending earmarked for Iowa or New Hampshire because they are first.  Right now, can you name a single Iowa or New Hampshire issue that we all more fully understand because of their spotlight?  I can't.  So, what exactly did we miss out on?

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 14:06:15 PM CST

And what we could have had... (4.00 / 1)

We could have gone on Super Tuesday and been part of that selection.

It is entirely possible that we won't have a winner on Tuesday, and the Democrats originally proposed a primary/caucus for Feb. 9th...we would have possibly played a part.

It is certainly better than undermining the grass roots building which did occur in 2004, even though there was no chance of influencing that race when it finally came here.

Instead, we have a bunch of pissed off party people...

And the media is already moving on to Nevada...hell they were covering the debate on MSNBC and the scroll only showed the Republican results.

Face it, it was a clusterf*ck from day one and brought us nothing of substance expect grief.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:30:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Clusterf*ck - agreed, but (4.00 / 1)

They would all be moving on to Nevada anyway (or whatever was next).  Are the Uber Tuesday states getting lots of "special" attention right now?  I haven't heard it, and my guess is that they are not because everyone is in Nevada.  Then the media will be moving on the South Carolina; then other states; etc.

As for the grassroots building, your experience may be different than mine.  In 2004, I did not see an energized grassroots that stayed energized until they were used nine or ten months later in the general election.  I think candidate specific energy doesn't trickle down very well to other candidates or the local party.  Again, your experience may be different than mine.

I think our party has serious problems with grassroots politics that harken back to the "reforms" after the 1968 convention.  After 1968, we became a candidate driven party, and that has trickled right down to the local level.  Candidates are not necessarily good party members.  

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 07:24:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Way too early (4.00 / 1)

It's way too early to make a decision on whether the decision of Michigan's Democratic leaders to hold an early primary was worth it.  Plus, why do opponents of the primary always fail to mention that Florida is doing the same thing we are and facing the same repercussions?

Other than to continue a debate about a primary that already happened, until we know what will happen with our delegates in August, what the result will be from the DNC's decision about what to do with those delegates, and if any reforms will be enacted as a result of Michigan's actions, all diaries like this do is continue to fuel the acrimony that has existed on this site for the past four months.

The bottom line about the impact on Michigan getting attention in the primary process is that the Michigan Republicans had a much more successful primary than the Michigan Democrats because the national Republicans and the Republicans candidates handled this far better than the national Democrats and Democratic candidates did, Kucinich excepted.  Florida will have a more successful Dem primary than we did because Florida won't let Obama and Edwards take their names off the Florida ballot.

You want to continue to argue these same points over and over, I'm game.  You want to move on and heal the wounds, I'm more than ready to go in that direction.

---

by: northernlib @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 14:11:14 PM CST

Ok, I'll bite (4.00 / 1)

Florida is as dumb as we are

---

by: greee @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 14:59:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No, I'd say not. They are at least a little smarter. (4.00 / 1)

They have a full set of candidates in Florida, unlike us. And they even have Rudy actually taking part in the campaign, lucky dogs. Will the Democratic candidates campaign there or does the four state pledge apply to Florida? Can't recall.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:07:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, Florida violated (4.00 / 1)

the pledge.

They, unlike Michigan, put the candidates on the ballot by law...something are sharp knives in the legislature apparently missed.

Yes, they will campaign in Florida.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:38:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You response reminds me (4.00 / 1)

of the types of tactics from the pro-war crowd towards the folks who were right about the Iraq war...

Many here told you what was going to happen, and can tell you exactly what will happen by the Convention.

The time has passed, the country has moved on and Michigan looks at its collective belly button...

The Michigan Democratic primary had no impact on the race at all (as predicted).

Delegates will be selected in March (after the candidate has already been chosen), so who gets voted to those spots doesn't matter.

The delegates will be seated at the Convention, but will get crappy hotel and seating accommodations.

Nothing we did will alter the discussion over Iowa and New Hampshire's decision to go first.

Nothing will change...we were disenfranchised over nothing, and will not have a competitive Democratic Primary again until at least 2016, possibly 2020...

Easy enough to predict.

 

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:36:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The importance of having an early say in campaigns (4.00 / 1)

The real damage that moving the primary up has done (aside from the money it cost the state) is that it left the Democrats with an underdeveloped organizing apparatus going into November. The relatively low turnout indicates that there will be some inertia to overcome in getting Democratic voters to the polls.

What I have found particularly frustrating about the current Iowa and New Hampshire caucus/primary setup is the level of effect it seems to have on the rest of the campaign. Clinton was the anointed front runner until she finishes third in the Iowa caucus; after that her campaign is designated "dead in the water." Then suddenly Obama is in trouble because he didn't win New Hampshire. What the heck sense does that make? It's false and entirely media-driven, but the early states have this amazing power to create or kill campaigns.

I agree, no one cares about Iowa issues after their caucus except for Iowans. And a temporary influx of cash every four years would hardly make a dent in our state's budget woes. But by moving the primary up we had the chance to shape who ends up winning the nomination, but by breaking party rules (which admittedly suck) we now (for the Democrats, anyway) we have no effect whatsoever.

---

by: liberalmomma @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 14:26:36 PM CST

A Dem (er) view (4.00 / 3)

I had a Republican friend, someone I haven't heard from for nine years, look me up internet-wise just to ask me if the Democrats loved me. As there will be no seating of MI dems in the convention this friend felt I should come on over to the dark side.

Better dead than red.

------------------------

When a Democrat says change they mean right the wrong. When a Republican says change they mean make money or they mean change the subject, please.

Loftlore

Margaret Mead said it very well:








"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

---

by: Loftlore @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 15:23:12 PM CST

THIS (4.00 / 1)

and I wouldn't be surprised if, to many 'swing' voters, it seems as though the party of Bush, DeVos, Nixon, Norquist, and DeLay cares about them more than the party of Granholm, Conyers, Schauer, FDR, and the Kennedys. Not a perception we want them to have in this battleground state in this critical election year.

THIS

I saw a great deal of Granholm backlash in the Livonia mayoral campaign, and the public's perception that the Democratic Party in Michigan is inept, and that the candidates didn't care about Michigan is going to have an effect all the way down the ticket.  We have a hard enough time as it is running Democrats here, and this isn't doing anything for our image.

Someone (maybe whose name rhymes with 'skewer'?) needs to get out there and make known the role that the Republicans had in moving the primary date up.  This can't be seen as strictly a "Dems are idiots" thing.

Did you exchange a walk-on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?
The PhiKapBlog

---

by: phikapbob @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 15:42:23 PM CST

Remember that Independents (4.00 / 1)

and even moderate Republicans love Carl Levin, maybe more than liberal Democrats do. He will be on the ballot and campaigning(I don't think he signed the four state pledge) and hopefully that has some positive influence on the swing voters.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:15:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Heads should roll at the MDP (4.00 / 1)

If you want to make a statement, get a new MDP Chair.

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:53:21 PM CST

Iowa and New Hampshire influence?? (4.00 / 1)

I think the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary may have proven themselves good filters to get rid of the riff raff that needs to work on becoming a better supported candidate ... but they certainly did not determine the candidates for either party in 2008.  February 5th seems to be the big day.

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 17:57:49 PM CST