You guys have seen the latest Clinton craziness, right? The freaking out over the "four delegates" that were supposedly wrenched from their hands by the DNC's RBC committee this past Saturday. To hear them say it, Obama is evvvviiiilllll because he denied Clinton four delegates she "won" in Michigan's potemkin one-candidate "primary". Why couldn't have Obama been magnanimous and just given Clinton those extra four delegates? He's going to win anyway, right? Would the four delegates have made a difference?
Of course, the issue isn't the four delegates....
Had the DNC handed out delegates based on January's sham vote, it would've ratified the election as a legitimate one (as ended up happening with Florida, by the way). Hillary and her acolytes would've then had a greater claim to her Michigan "victory" of 328,309 votes to zero for Obama....
Clinton doesn't give a damn about those extra delegates. She wanted to ratify the Michigan election and claim that 328,309-vote advantage for her tally.
So when you see Clinton surrogates in a rage about those "four delegates", understand that their rage has nothing to do with four delegates. It has to do with the blow it dealt to their propaganda efforts.
UPDATE FROM JOHN: Joe just called. He's arrived at the hotel where the meeting is taking place. To quote Joe: "There aren't ten thousand people here." (That's what the protest organizers were promising.)
Heading over to the Wardman Park Marriott for the DNC Rules Committee meeting. I'll be liveblogging the proceedings (they start at 930am Eastern). C-SPAN will be covering it live, too. Leave it to the Democrats to get caught up in a contentious intra-party battle over rules just five months before the election. Maddening.
For the past months, we've had to listen to Hillary Clinton and her spinners talk about the fair result in Michigan. That would be the election where she was the only person on the ballot. Former Senator Don Riegle offered his views on the Michigan primary in the Detroit News yesterday:
The Michigan Democratic primary election offered a Soviet-like ballot -- in that Michigan voters were not given a real choice among candidates. There was no competitive Democratic primary in Michigan -- a primary where viable candidates compete to earn the support of voters. Instead, Michigan Democratic Party officials permitted an election to take place even though three of the viable candidates (Barack Obama, John Edwards and Bill Richardson) had properly removed their names from the ballot to fully comply with DNC rules. The election went forward with only one viable candidate on the ballot (Hillary Rodham Clinton) in direct violation of DNC rules and with full knowledge -- and acknowledgement -- that the Michigan delegation would not be seated at the nominating convention in Denver.
As a result, the percentage of Michigan voter turnout was lower than any other state except Utah -- a state the Republicans won in 2004 with 70 percent of the vote. It is estimated that a competitive primary would have resulted in at least 700,000 more Democratic voters in Michigan. In fact, those who might have voted actually represent a greater number than those that did vote in the rogue Democratic primary.
Given that voters were offered no real choice among candidates and that Michigan's vote would not count, voter participation as a consequence was reduced by 50 percent or more.
The results of this fake primary cannot be used as a proper basis for determining the allocation of delegates to the remaining two Presidential candidates. As there was no real competition, there is no meaningful basis for accurately measuring either candidate's level of support in Michigan.
"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange." "But I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."
And let's stop playing games. Florida and Michigan knew what they were getting into. And in Florida, at least, practically every single Democrat voted in favor of the decision that ultimately led to them losing their delegates. And they knew it, but they didn't care. So let's stop pretending like they're children, even though they clearly acted like children, knew the rules, broke the rules, and now are paying for it. In any case, how much you want to bet Hillary is now considering appealing this Saturday's upcoming decision so she can drag this out another 4 weeks, when the appeal would be heard. Bet ya. But I have a feeling that next week the entire party is going to come down on her head like a ton of bricks if she doesn't concede. (Though, watch her postpone her race, or some other cute term, rather than concede, just in case, well, you know.)
What's been missing from this discussion of Florida's and Michigan's delegates is an acknowledgment that Florida and Michigan were told what would happen if they broke the rules - they'd lose their delegates - they told the DNC "screw you," and broke the rules anyway, so they lost their delegates. Now, with Hillary's help, they're acting like "gee, how did that happen?" Uh, it happened because your state officials (the Republican legislature, in the case of Florida) chose to break the rules knowing full well that the price would be losing your delegates. Got a gripe about having lost your voice at the Democratic convention? Have a little chat with your state officials. But please, let's stop this little charade of pretending like losing your delegates was a big surprise. Hillary's own top advisers helped put the delegate plan into place. Everyone knew what would happen, but they did it anyway.
Hillary has made such a big deal about Michigan and Florida (because it's the only way she can now steal the election), that you have to wonder why she'd keep as two of her top advisers men who were responsible for taking those states' delegates away. I mean, imagine two of your top advisers being responsible for what you claim is your number one grievance, and then keeping them as your top advisers? If Hillary really cared about Michigan and Florida, she'd fire Ickes and McCauliffe.
Harold Ickes, a top adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign who voted for Democratic Party rules that stripped Michigan and Florida of their delegates, now is arguing against the very penalty he helped pass.
In a conference call Saturday, the longtime Democratic Party member contended the DNC should reconsider its tough sanctions on the two states, which held early contests in violation of party rules. He said millions of voters in Michigan and Florida would be otherwise disenfranchised - before acknowledging moments later that he had favored the sanctions.
"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he [Senator Levin] said.
"Carl, take it to the bank," I [McCauliffe] said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."
This is actually pretty funny. For the past few weeks, Hillary Clinton has become the great defender of Michigan voters. She went to Detroit last month to deliver the message that she alone was fighting for them:
“The people in Michigan and particularly Democrats in Michigan know that Michigan matters in both the primary and general election,” she told a crowd of more than 300 people at the AFSCME Local 25 union hall in Detroit. “If the Democrats send a message that we don’t care about your votes, I’m sure that John McCain and the Republicans will be happy to have them.”
Huh. Interestingly, the people of Michigan have a different take -- and it's not good for Clinton. From Political Wire:
Sen. Barack Obama "holds a small lead over Sen. John McCain in the race for Michigan's 17 electoral votes, but McCain holds a significant lead over Hillary Clinton," according to a new EPIC-MRA poll.
In general election match ups, Obama leads McCain, 43% to 41%, while McCain leads Clinton, 46% to 37%.
