The Florida-Michigan Resolution

Yesterday, the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws committee finally decided just what would happen with the delegations from Florida and Michigan, which as we all know had their delegates stripped by the party for holding their primaries too early in violation of a party rule. The decision? Their full delegation will be seated, but each delegate will only have half a vote as a penalty. Also, the results from Florida will be counted as they were in the primary, but the 44% of Michigan ballots that chose "uncommitted" were counted towards Obama, whose name was not on the ballot in that state. Clinton earned 55% there.

Finally, a resolution that compromises both sides in a very difficult situation. Now can we please stop making a big deal out of this? I'm talking to you, Hillary Clinton! This decision only gave her a net of 24 votes at the convention, and while it is a fair decision that recognizes the interests and arguments of both sides, it does not bring here anywhere near Obama, or being able to make her case that she is more electable with any sort of credibility. He remains nearly two hundred delegate equivalents ahead of her, and now needs to garner just 67 more to reach the requisite 2118, adjusted from the previous 2026 to account for the Florida/Michigan delegations. This changed almost nothing, except for laying Obama back some twenty delegates. And here's the thing--the primary season ends this Tuesday, and with three remaining contests, she has no chance to close the gap without going to the superdelegates, who are expected based on recent behavior to support the majority of pledged delegates and back Obama.

Now Clinton and her supporters are complaining about this decision, ostensibly because they want their votes counted, but in reality it is because this changed absolutely nothing. At the end of the day, she is (as a practical matter) no closer to catching up with Obama than she was at the beginning. But her supporters have turned seriously ugly because of this, even going so far as to say that they will vote for McCain if Hillary isn't nominated or booing Obama, the presumptive nominee.

The party will unite after the convention, Hillary? Really?

Because what we are seeing in your insistence to keep running is going to destroy the party. Florida and Michigan, your last great hopes, were resolved in a way that is fair to everyone, and you are no better off because of it. What happens after Tuesday, when the superdelegates begin to announce their allegiance to Obama, and he finds himself with a majority of the convention's delegates? Are you going to keep fighting until the convention itself, as you and your supporters have hinted? Because if you do, and even then fail to get the nomination, the Democratic Party that leaves Denver will be even more fractured than when it entered. It's over, Senator. The people have chosen, and shouldn't that be enough for you? Or do you really not care about the people, and are only so egotistical to believe that you deserve the nomination no matter what they say, willingly sabotaging your party's chances of winning in November by deepening the rift between your supporters and Obama's? Way to...umm...unite the party?

Alex Severin- "Mr. Gore, choose a side!"

Mr. Gore, Mr. Activist, Mr. Vice President, or whatever you would like to be called, your vote is an absolute necessity to the completion of this excruciatingly lengthy process. I for one, and I know I am not the only one, have grown extremely weary of the constant party bickering and underhanded attacks that are being leveled by both candidates (although Mrs. Clinton has been throwing more punches as of late).

The coveted endorsement is one that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are bitterly fighting for, and for good reason. Gore, who recently turned 60 years old, has been called the “party elder” and is viewed as a father figure for the Democrats. But Gore remains stubborn on the issue, justifying his indecision by saying,

“I’m simply watching and listening to the campaign. As a delegate to the convention I will cast my vote at the proper time. I haven’t ruled out making an endorsement prior to that time, but I haven’t been moved to do so.”

Others suggest, no matter how farfetched an idea, that Gore, not unlike John Edwards, may be waiting it out until a nominee is determined so he would be in contention for the Vice President spot again. To me this seems extremely unlikely, but intriguing in its own way. Gore has helped achieve magnificent things for this country (remember that he occupied the Vice Presidency during a time of grand economic prosperity in which the US government sat on a three trillion dollar surplus) and despite his increasing age, he could help increase environmental awareness in a country with the greatest ratio of hummers per square mile (sarcasm of course!).

No matter what Gore’s intentions are, the time is now! Mr. Gore, your vote is necessary in order for the presidential process to move forward. One thing is for certain, the longer the democrats battle without choosing a clear winner, the more time Republican hopeful John McCain has to run a virtually attack-free campaign. And no mater if you are a Clinton supporter or an Obama supporter, allowing McCain to run free of criticism helps no one!

Written By Alex Severin

Governor Richardson endorses Barack Obama

I'll try to keep this one short. Today, New Mexico Governor and former presidential candidate Bill Richardson endorsed Barack Obama. The endorsement was highly coveted by both the Clinton and Obama camps, as Richardson is one of the more influential figures in the Democratic Party who had yet to endorse a candidate.

My congratulations go out to Governor Richardson, for finally deciding he could not stand on the sidelines any longer, and solidly endorsing a candidate. Thus far, a number of the big name Democrats--former vice president Al Gore, Speaker of the House Nanci Pelosi, and recent presidential candidate John Edwards to name a few--have declined to take a position for Obama or Clinton, due to their desire to let the primary process play itself out. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic nominee will not be chosen by pledged delegates--the closeness in public opinion polls and primary results between the two has made it progressively less likely that one candidate would win enough pledged delegates to put them within a stone's throw of the 2,025 threshold. So, it has come down to the superdelegates and influential party leaders to choose the nominee.

Unfortunately, they have proven reluctant to do so, mainly because of the closeness of the race between the two Senators. This is unfortunate because as long as there is no solid coalition forming on the side of one candidate, the Democratic will leave the convention as fractured as it will be upon entering it. Its time for the party leadership to take a stand for one candidate, end this senseless feuding between two people with essentially the same beliefs, and start getting ready for what could be a tough general election. Democrats, it is time to make up your minds.

I could write another essay on this, but I promised to keep it short.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/us/politics/21cnd-endorse.html?ref=politics

Obama wins Wyoming

Major news outlets are reporting that Barack Obama will win the Wyoming caucus today.

The delegate split is as follows:
Obama: 7
Clinton: 5

This marks the first primary since Hillary Clinton's big night on March 4th, in which she won both Ohio and Texas.

Barack Obama has now won 29 of 43 states that have been decided thus far. He has been dominant in caucuses, however, winning a commanding 12 out of the 13 caucuses that have been decided. Attention now shifts to the Mississippi primaries on March 11th.

Boneheads of the Week: Florida and Michigan

Dear Florida and Michigan,

You broke the rules. The DNC told you that you couldn't hold your primaries before the approved date on February 5th, but you didn't listen. No, you felt as though you're states were too important to be grouped together with all the riff raff on Super Tuesday. The DNC even warned you. They told you that if you moved your primaries before February 5th, your delegates wouldn't be seated in August.

But you didn't listen. No, you passed legislation that mandated your primaries be held before the rest on Super Tuesday, so that your state could have more influence. The DNC was mad, sure, but they gave you another chance. They told you that if you repealed the legislation and moved your primaries back to where they were supposed to be, they wouldn't penalize you. You had months and months to consider what you were doing, as well as the consequences.

But you didn't listen. You went ahead with your primaries against the rules of the DNC, and they punished you, just like they said they would. Your delegates aren't going to be seated at the convention. You took away the vote and voice of your people, not the DNC. Don't complain that your people are being disenfranchized, Florida Governor Charlie Crist, you were the one that allowed this.

But now you argue that the DNC is at fault? You say that your delegations "will be seated" no matter what? If you wanted to have any say in this election, you would have followed the rules, just like the rest of the states.

But no, you're too important for that. And now you're mad, fighting mad. Do you hear that sound, Florida and Michigan? It's me playing the worlds smallest violin.