Note: This post has received a lot of attention (well, for this blog, anyway) because it has been tagged on foxnews.com. If you are a new reader, I encourage you to comment on this post, even if you think I am totally off base – if you have a better idea, please put it in the comments section. All feedback, as long as it is PG rated, is welcome. Also, take a look around the rest of the site, and hopefully you will find something you like.
Today, the Florida Democratic Party announced that there will be no re-vote in the Sunshine State. That means the only current results coming out of Florida happened when none of the candidates were allowed to campaign or air advertisements in the state. Furthermore, we are nowhere close to figuring out a way to seat Florida’s delegation.
Michigan is worse. At least in Florida, all of the candidates were on the ballot, which gives that vote the aura of legitimacy. Clinton, however, was the only major candidate on the Democratic ballot, beating “Uncommitted” 55% to 40%. You can’t give all of the “Uncommitted” votes to Obama, because there is no way to know how many of those votes would have gone to Obama. You also can’t give Clinton all of the votes that she got in Michigan, because she was the only candidate Michiganders could vote for, and people generally like to have their vote count.
So, what do you do? Unfortunately, there is no easy answer, or even moderately difficult answer. Every answer is going to anger one, or both, of the campaigns.
The first thing you must do is seat the delegations, and start with that as a baseline. National Convention delegates tend to be party leaders within the states, and activists who hold every dinner party, bake sale, and voter registration drive they can. You can’t piss off the most fervent, organized, and dedicated supporters you have in two of the largest swing states. Not seating Florida or Michigan could have the very real consequence of giving both states to McCain.
Secondly, you have to understand that no candidate will agree to a deal that puts their chances at the nomination in jeopardy. That means that there is no way Clinton will agree to seating both full delegations with a 50/50 split for each candidates, because that solution takes away two of her better chances of closing the gap between her and Obama, and reduces the number of superdelegates Obama needs to get the nomination. Obama will not let the Florida and Michigan votes dictate the seating, because both advantage Clinton and close the pledged delegate gap, a gap Obama needs to maintain in order to convince superdelegates that a vote for Clinton is a vote against the people.
Quick recap: we have to seat both delegations, but we can’t seat them in a way that is unfair to both. Could we seat them in a way that is fair to both, slightly unfair to Florida voters, and totally crazy?
Here’s the plan: all delegates are “superdelegates” that come out of Michigan. Michigan gets its full delegation, but each member of that delegation gets to vote for whomever they choose at the convention. Florida’s vote is split – half of the delegates are tied to the vote in Florida, half the votes are “superdelegates” that are on their own.
There are some clear advantages to this plan. First, both delegations get seated. Second, most of the delegates are not tied to sham elections. Third, both candidates have an equal shot at these superdelegates, which is more fair. Fourth, pledged delegates can change their minds, anyway, so it is kind of a false bonus for those who make it to the convention, but it seems like Michigan and Florida are getting something extra out of this. Fifth, these delegates are chosen by the people of Florida and Michigan (I am assuming – that’s how it is done in many other states) through a tiered election process; if you get elected in your precinct, you go to the county convention, then to state if you make it out of the county, and then to the national convention if you win at the state level.
There are some clear drawbacks. The main one is that the vote in Michigan still doesn’t count, and the Florida vote only counts for half – I’m not sure if Clinton would go for it. That is why I have half the vote counting in Florida, for the Clinton buy-in, but I don’t know if that is enough. There is also the issue of pissing off the delegates from other states who want the kind of autonomy delegates from Michigan and Florida will get. Finally, the chaos of having well over 100 additional “superdelegates” that disrupts the candidate’s math and the confidence voters have in the process (see my earlier post: Nana and the Superdelegates”).
If you have a better idea, let me know, and it will get posted. Or, just tell me why I am wrong – always love to hear that, as well.
P.S. Someone should tell the Florida Democratic Party that the headline “Democrats see chance to unseat 3 Cuban-Americans” is probably not the best move in Miami. Even if it is from some newspaper, don’t post it on your website. Just don’t.
March 19, 2008 at 2:29 pm |
I think the candidates are more worried about pissing off voters in general than party activists in these states, so most of their votes superdelegates doesn’t really help and it goes against the whole “respecting the blah blah million people who voted” line of the clinton campaign. I like the idea Halperin reported a few days ago – split Michigan 50-50 and seat the florida delegation but give them each only 1/2 of a vote.
May 14, 2008 at 7:00 am |
I like your idea: I don’t think one can come up with a more reasonable solution.