BY TAYLOR MARSH
Hopefully, since you're reading this post, you didn't have to watch "Recount,"
the incredibly gut wrenching HBO recreation of election 2000, to understand
that Democrats cannot simply ignore the votes in Michigan and Florida. It's
a preposterous suggestion, one which Senator Obama believes he can hide behind.
It's insulting, especially when there are many logical ways to solve the challenge.
Revoting would have been best, in my view, but Obama didn't want that so his
supporters in Michigan ignored the importance of voting in favor of trying to
help Obama get to the magic nomination number by stiffing a revote. Try another
...In Michigan, Clinton received 55 percent of the vote. According to Thegreenpapers.com, she thus should receive 73 pledged delegates based on that percentage.
What about the 50 remaining uncommitted delegates, and 7 collectively cast for Sen. Chris Dodd and Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, who were also on the ballot?
Some of those 50 delegates might have been for Clinton as a second choice to candidates other than Obama, so it would be totally unfair to award all 50 delegates to Obama.
One little known fact: Clinton complied with party rules by allowing her name to remain on the ballot, as did Dodd and Kucinich. Obama was not forced by party rules to remove his name Ã¢â‚¬” he chose to do so.
The Rules Committee has several options. The fairest would be to allocate those 57 pledged delegates, to Clinton and Obama by the same ratio of their standing to one another in the average of the most recent Michigan statewide polls prior to the Jan. 15 primary. Or perhaps one Solomonic compromise, more generous to Obama than to Clinton, would be to divide the remaining delegates approximately 50-50 between the two of them, 28-27 (giving Clinton the extra delegate since she led in all the latest statewide polls prior to Jan. 15).
Florida's compromise solution is even easier. Clinton won 50 percent of the vote, while Obama won 33 percent of the 1.7 million Democratic votes cast. According to Thegreenpapers.com, that would give Clinton 105 delegates and Obama 69 delegates. That leaves 11 elected John Edwards delegates yet to decide, as well as 13 still unpledged superdelegates. (Eight supers have already decided for Clinton and five have decided for Obama). ...
The real issue is that Clinton wants to count the votes, while Obama has shown no urgency to do the same. How anyone can support a candidate who is actively shrugging off counting every single vote cast is beyond me. It's anti-democratic and anti-American. At this point the Obama team is playing from the Bush-Cheney playbook. It's reprehensible, but people who run the Democratic Party don't seem to care. Remarkable that Senator Obama is getting away with it while Democrats are openly ignoring what he's doing. Meanwhile, many turn around and blame Clinton for demanding to COUNT ALL THE VOTES.
Watch "Recount." You don't back down until it's over. Folks, it's not over yet, even with reality playing over and over in my head: In the general election the popular vote is trumped by the electoral college; in a Democratic primary fight for the nomination delegate count trumps popular vote. Whether either of these realities is the correct one is another subject entirely.
That's why this fight is critical, because Democrats have got to understand that the strongest candidate against John McCain is Hillary Clinton. Obama's team thinks he can win Nevada in November? Seriously? Talk about optimistic. Missouri? Really? Not convinced. Where does Obama get the map to win against John McCain? Florida? Ha! Appalachia? Yeah, right. Folks, this isn't too difficult. Simply quit sucking on the hope straw so hard, take it out of your mouth, and then exhale, because too much hope without a reality dose fogs the brain.
Are you going to D.C. on May 31st? Need a ride? Help others. Get a plan. Overnight open thread to hash it out.