|
Edited on Sun Feb-17-08 03:11 PM by Bread and Circus
I live in Michigan and I know of no one who has ever said they would sit on their hands in protest if the Michigan fake primary didn't get ratified by the DNC and have the Michigan delegates seated.
This was not on the "outrage radar screen" in any editorial or newspaper article prior to Hillary et. al. making this a problem after she realized she might not be able to win the nomination without Michigan and Florida.
Furthermore, she didn't make this an issue until AFTER Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada were out of the way and South Carolina was decidedly going Obama's way AND ONLY AFTER her campaign knew that the non-elections in Michigan and Florida were going to go her way based mainly on name recognition.
This "outrage" about voter disenfranchisement didn't come from the base or the grass roots. This came from the Clinton campaign alone.
This is eerily similar to how the Right Wing creates "issues" almost out of whole cloth that end up dominating the debate but has very little, if any, basis amongst the people on who's behalf the issue is seemingly being waged.
I can't entirely speak for Florida but as a resident of Michigan I can tell you there has been ZERO outrage in any of the papers or among the populace of any scale prior to Clinton making this an issue.
The only grumblings I am aware of were from the people who couldn't vote for Barack or Edwards and that wasn't a very vocal or very organized effort other than to "vote uncommitted" which was most prominently suggested by John Conyers.
Stabenow, Levin, and Granholm were silent and I've seen nothing from the main papers or local newschannels.
This is kind of like a "brownshirting" or "astroturfing" of the issue.
The fact that the pundits and even we are giving it serious discussion without paying attention to where this RUSE comes from (as it was Hillary who was one of the signers of the rules in the first place) just goes to show how easily it is to conjure a phantom issue like this.
Has anyone actually heard a rank and file Democratic voter from Michigan or Florida ever say they would sit on their hands come November if we actually followed the rules?
I know I haven't.
Some say this could cost us Michigan and Florida if we do nothing.
That is utter B.S. and there is no poll or survey to support that. It's another Mark Penn et. al. talking point.
If it comes down to Obama vs. McCain in Michigan, Obama will blow McCain out of the water.
I don't know about Florida as I don't live there but I doubt the deciding factors will come down to the petty disagreement with candidates following the rules that they agreed with and signed on to.
The Michigan and Florida problem is part of a bigger problem of how to arrange the primary schedule but that's not even being given the attention it needs and now is not the right time to be discussing it anyway. WE have the system we set in place and we have to follow the rules. What kind of party is the Democratic Party if it can follow its own rules?
The time to fix the overall primary schedule is next year, after we the election is over and before the next cycle has started.
But who's with me when I say that Clinton won't be leading on that problem, whether she wins or not?
Hell, none of these numbskulls have even made issue of the bigger problem, which is making sure ALL the votes are counted correctly.
Where's Hillary's outrage on that?
|