Should Florida and Michigan vote again? ~ Joan Walsh

[mzmolly]

http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/election_2008/2008/03/05/florida_michigan/index.html?source=rss&aim=/opinion/walsh/election_2008">SALON

The talking heads on MSNBC and CNN had a mind-meld Tuesday night: Hillary Clinton threw "the kitchen sink" at Barack Obama, and her negativity paid off big time. She won Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island, by large margins in two of three states, while losing Vermont. That sets up what they all pretend is a nightmare, but it's really a hot media fantasy: Mutant Superdelegates Pick Nominee!

Cable television ratings aside, let's all hope it doesn't go there.

First of all, let's take the stories apart. After 11 losses in a row, Clinton won three impressive victories in big, diverse states. The "kitchen sink strategy" analysis is silly. The Nevada and South Carolina races were arguably nastier. Yet over and over Tuesday night, the talking heads lumped together a supposedly toxic trifecta of NAFTA, Rezko and "the 3 a.m. ad" as having carried the day for a newly nasty Clinton. But in fact, only the 3 a.m. ad -- you saw it, the White House Terror Phone ringing when your adorable kids are asleep -- was Clinton's debatable creation. The NAFTA gaffe was entirely the Obama camp's doing, when they failed to figure out what economics guru Austin Goolsbee told the Canadians, and when. And Clinton didn't decree that the trial of Tony Rezko would begin March 3. On the other hand, Obama is still ahead in delegates, he's still the likely nominee, and while he's had a bad week, he's run a great campaign until now. The notion that he has to panic or suddenly change course seems silly.

Still, as much as I've tried to swat away the specter of superdelegates deciding the convention, because I've believed ultimately one candidate, probably Obama, would get a decisive voter and delegate majority, I have to admit it's looming as a larger worry. It will be extremely hard for Clinton to close Obama's lead in pledged delegates, but it will also be hard for Obama to win the number of delegates he needs to decisively win without superdelegates. Lately I find myself wondering: Why aren't more powerful Democrats in both the Obama and Clinton camps lobbying for a revote in Florida and Michigan? Is it simply about money? Sure, it would be expensive, but both candidates are raising money phenomenally.

[Birthmark]

1. A re-vote is unnecessary and unacceptable...

...in FL.

Whatever MI decides to do is fine with me, though.

[Fresh_Start]

3. I totally agree with you

no Florida recount which includes fewer voters should displace the actual vote in the state

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. Why

The results would be the same...

[Fresh_Start]

7. Because voters should matter

you shouldn't say that 500,000 voters are more important than 1,300,000 voters.

So if the original vote was 1,300,000 and a recount is 500,000, the recount is undemocratic

[Birthmark]

8. There shouldn't be and won't be a "do over."

We voted at the time appointed by the State of Florida, in a manner consistent with Florida law. The votes were properly counted. The voters did their job.

The squabble between the DNC and the super-delegates should be settled by some means other than penalizing the people --who had, and have, little to no power over this mess. Unseating FL's super-delegates seems the fairest, most appropriate, and most proportional response for the DNC if they think it's that important. Taking it out on the average FL Democrat will go a long way to making McCain President in 2009.

[Fresh_Start]

9. yes, strip the superdelegates not the voters

I mean if you care about democracy

[Birthmark]

11. Yup. I view this as a fundamental issue.

Does the DNC care more about the voters or their authority? That is the question that will be answered between now and the convention. If they answer it wrong, they'll lose the election in November...unless they can find out some way to win without FL and possibly MI. Seems unlikely to me. But if the DNC feels lucky, I guess that they can try.

[Fresh_Start]

12. doesn't it make more sense to punish the Florida party officials

rather than the Florida voters

[Birthmark]

15. Yup. You are 100% correct.

[CTyankee]

2. Good question. BUT, HRC's campaign wouldn't go for the revote in MI and FL

because they have already said that the voters "have spoken" in those 2 votes, so it would be difficult for them to backtrack on that.

However, push comes to shove, it may be that a revote is the only way to resolve an intra-party problem.

[mzmolly]

5. Could be?

:shrug:

[madfloridian]

4. She will get her delegates, come hell or high water. She has the power.

It is direct affront to the DNC and Dean's leadership. Everyone knows it.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1882

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1879

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1883

It does no good to fight anymore.

[Cha]

10. It's not over till it's over,

mad..hang in there!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4841793

[mzmolly]

16. I think she's going to lose this particular battle.

You're great at providing us info MF. Thanks again. :pals:

[sandyj999]

13. This state can't afford the cost of another primary. n/t

[mzmolly]

14. The suggestion is that the campaigns pay for this.

:shrug: