MyDD :: Obama should play hardball with MI & FL

Obama should play hardball with MI & FL

by RP McMurphy, Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 06:30:41 PM EST

It was none other than James Carville who once said "When your opponent is drowning, throw the son of a bitch an anvil." It's time for Obama to take Carville's advice to heart and quash Hillary's underhanded attempt at a Michigan and Florida re-vote.

We all know that neither Hillary nor her supporters truly care about Michigan or Florida -- had Obama won either one, we'd have had another state to add to the list of states that "don't matter." No, behind all the phony altruism is cold-blooded political maneuvering. Hillary's been knocked on her ass and now wants Obama to help her up so she can knee-cap him. Instead, Obama should take a page from the Clinton playbook and kick her while she's down -- something that Hillary herself would never hesitate to do. Obama could then prove to Hillary's supporters, albeit perversely, that he's tough enough to face the Republicans in the fall.

And so, I'm calling on Obama to reject any notion of a Florida and Michigan re-vote. Instead, he can simply split the delegations 50-50 when he takes control of the credentials committee. Clinton supporters will predictably cry bloody-murder, but such a course of action is well within the rules Senator Clinton agreed to. Moreover, for a campaign that employs every dirty trick imaginable, from lawsuits to poaching pledged delegates, to suddenly assert moral indignation would be laughable. So go ahead Barack, toss Hillary that anvil.

Tags: michigan, florida, re-vote (all tags)

Permalink :: 22 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Obama should play hardball with MI & FL (2.00 / 3)

Please ask Obama to follow your advice. I dare him. Actually I invite him to do just that. Please!

by Fleaflicker on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 06:41:03 PM EST

I agree (2.00 / 1)

I'm with you - let him do that and watch McCain take the states by 20 points in November!

by cmugirl90 on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:24:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama should play hardball (2.00 / 3)

This is exactly Obama's plan... Stiff 'em.

His surrogates mouth talking points while he refuses every meaningful proposal. Sharpton is down in Florida preparing a legal challenge. This is exactly what Obama's tactical geniuses are up to.

by MediaFreeze on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:26:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama should play hardball (none / 0)

You are spreading this lie all day again and you still don't have any proof or anything even close to it. Are you actually proud of what you are doing?

by marcotom on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 08:44:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama should play hardball (2.00 / 1)

As I asked you several times already. Please point out one lie. I would be very interested in discussing it. Please respond.

by MediaFreeze on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 08:55:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama should (none / 0)

Yes, please do this Sen. Obama! I agree. It would be the deathknell of his campaign.

I think that the Obama campaign knows that it eventually is going to have to give some ground on this. At the point that you have people raising money to pay for primaries that will count, he is not in a politically tenable position in saying "no delegates."

Personally, I think that the whole thing is rediculous beyond belief and the DNC erred mightily in its original decision. But, it is what it is.

Let me sketch out a scenario for Obama supporters. I am not advocating liklihood, although I think that it is probable:

The primaries / caucuses are over. Clinton has won PA, WV, KY, and Puerto Rico. Obama has won MS, OR and MT. IN, SD, and NC split about evenly. Exclude superdelegates.

Without FL / MI delegates, Obama leads in the delegate estimation. Without FL / MI votes, Obama leads in the popular vote.

If you count FL / MI, Clinton leads narrowly or is roughly ties with Obama in estimated delegates. Counting FL / MI, Clinton leads in the popular vote.

The credentials committee affirms its decision- no delegates for Florida and Michigan.

Obama is the nominee.

Is that really politically tenable for Obama? Can we have a convention with no participation from MI and FL. Will the outstanding superdelegates countenance disenfranchising these states, particularly if their negating their participation changes the outcome?

I don't know the answers to those questions. I think that the Clinton people think not. I think that the Obama people think that it would work.

In all of the euphoria of the 11 state streak for Obama in Februaru, it seems that Obama supporters (some, not all) have forgotten that this is a close contest. Very close, by some metrics. If Obama wins the nomination by exluding states from participating, then there are millions of us who are Clinton supporters who will be outraged and might register that outrage with a vote for someone else in November.

We will be just as outraged as Obama folks would be if Obama won by a big enough margin in delegates to where MI / FL don't matter and superdelegates overturned the peoples' verdict at the convention.

If I were Obama, I would try to avoid this scenario like the plague. I think that the smarter thing to do is to have a do-over, and try to win them. In Michigan, I bet he would be slightly favored. He starts out well behind in Florida, but if he wins there, he would unquestionably be the nominee.

I bet that he will acquiesce to a do-over in these states, in the end.

by arkansasdemocrat on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 09:38:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama should play hardball with MI & FL (2.00 / 2)

I like the spirit of this diary, but I can't agree. Obama can't allow Hillary to paint him as being complicit in the disenfranchisement of voters in FL and MI -- even if he had nothing to do with creating the rules.

He should, however, be pounding on the Clinton campaign by pointing out over and over again that the Clinton campaign's top advisor, Harold Ickes, voted to strip FL and MI of their delegates!

John McCain the flip-flopper...

by chinapaulo on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 06:44:16 PM EST

MI and FL revote underhanded? (2.00 / 2)

A Michigan and Florida re-vote is a bad thing? Howard Dean said that he was open to such a thing, and I think that MI and FL deserve a voice. Why is it that everything Hillary does is seen as evil and underhanded? Why? She is not evil.

In my opinion, FL shouldn't have to re-vote. It wasn't their fault and plus everyone's name was on the ballot.

by HillaryKnight08 on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 06:46:43 PM EST

Political neophyte? (2.00 / 1)

Statements like "behind all the phony altruism is cold-blooded political maneuvering" expose your naivete.

Of course it's all political. I'd be surprised if any major action taken by either camp isn't informed by their political ramifications.

Doesn't all have to be dirty and cold-blooded.

by Sieglinde on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:02:24 PM EST

Try winning in Nov without FL and MI (none / 0)

Just try. Idiot.

by sinclair on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:03:35 PM EST

Re: Obama should play hardball (2.00 / 1)

Yup, good plan.

Obama should destroy all chance of victory in the fall to win the nomination. That'll show those rule breakers in Florida and Michigan.

by MediaFreeze on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:05:48 PM EST

Re: Obama should play hardball with MI and FL (2.00 / 1)

Obama says to the voters of Florida and Michigan he won't count their votes in March. Obama begs the voters of Florida and Michigan for their votes in November. Meanwhile the McCain Campaign is running non-stop commercials showing what Obama said in March about Florida and Michigan votes. Great Plan!

by orionwest on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:07:17 PM EST

Oh yes yes (2.00 / 1)

Please tell me you work for the Obama campaign!

by Edgar08 on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:08:03 PM EST

Re: Obama should play hardball (2.00 / 4)

Heres what one voter in Michigan thinks of your plan:

the arrogance is stunning

Florida is a throw away now, "Mr and Mrs. Sixpack" in Michigan will vote Democratic regardless of how the state is treated. Wow.

Let's walk through the path to disenfranchisement, shall we? Let's assume the Michigan/Florida problem is not settled in a way that actually includes the will of the voters in Michigan -- say they aren't seated at all or the delegates are split 50/50.

I'm a typical Michigan voter and this story has been on the front page of the two major papers on and off for months. I'm at risk of losing my job, my wife has lost hers, I'm surrouding by "for sale" signs in my neighbors' lawns, all the politicians out there seem all so concerned about the ECONOMY but no one seems to give a wet rat's ass what the people of Michigan think.

Am I going to listen to my union? Hell no, they helped get me into this mess. Jennifer Granholm? Kwame Kilpatrick? What has a Democrat done for me lately?

Now here comes the Democratic Convention. Oh look! The entire country matters except for the people in my state and Florida. Our chairs are essentially empty. Awesome how voters in Guam got a say in this but not me...because the Democrats in my state tried to push our agenda to the forefront and the party shut us down in favor of the will of New Hampshire. So much for post-convention bump.

Nobody needs to worry about my problems, the national press and the Democratic contender have made it clear I'll vote Democratic no matter how I'm crapped on.

Yeah, watch me.

by MediaFreeze on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:09:28 PM EST

Re: Obama should play hardball (2.00 / 1)

You obviously don't understand the ramifications of what you're recommending Obama do. As a Hillary supporter, I hope and pray he listens to advice such as yours.

by SoCalHillMan on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:17:12 PM EST

Re: Obama should play hardball (2.00 / 2)

Go ahead. This is beyond stupid, but if it's your heart's desire, do it. Then try to win in November.

by DaleA on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:20:24 PM EST

All part of Obama's (2.00 / 2)

brilliant 48-state strategy

99% perspiration

by DaveOinSF on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:20:59 PM EST

Re: Obama should play hardball with MI FL (2.00 / 3)

What about winning in November? If Obama gets the nomination, and he fights against a revote, Dems can forget about winning in November. He'll do anything to win the nomination! Ooops, that's what you guys say about Hillary. I guess that old saying about when you point your finger at someone else, you've got three fingers pointing at yourself is true.

by hearthmoon on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 08:10:30 PM EST

Re: Disagree (none / 0)

Must have been a caucus, right?

by marcotom on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 08:44:36 PM EST

Re: Obama should play (2.00 / 2)

I remember when disenfranchising Florida Democrats was George W. Bush's domain.

by arkansasdemocrat on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 09:23:37 PM EST

Re: Obama (none / 0)

Obama will never be President. He will either lose to Hillary or Mac will beat him soundly...in the electoral college

by rossinatl on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 09:33:58 PM EST

Here's the irony (2.00 / 1)

MI and FL could revote, and it still wouldn't change Obama's lead among pledged delegates (barring any major disasters in his campaign).

So if Senator Obama really wanted to be a new kind of politician, he'd argue forcefully for the revote, realizing that democracy is supposed to be about getting everyone to vote, and getting everyone's vote to count.

I like Senator Obama, and will happily vote for him in November. But his willingness to play politics on this issue to his own advantage doesn't exactly live up to his ideal of spreading a new kind of politics.

by fsm on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 09:42:17 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.