The history of the world, if properly understood, can be used to predict the future ~ the better our understanding of the past, the better our ability to predict the future.
Along these, lines, I present two graphical plots of the share of total world GDP for two "emerging" powerhouses ~ India and China, along with the share for two current powerhouses ~ Western Europe and the US (source: The World Economy: Historical Statistics by Angus Maddison).
Before I start, for the sake of full disclosure, I am an Obama supporter. However, I want to make it clear that I am more interested in the future of our Democratic Party than any particular candidate. It is out of this concern for the party that I am writting this diary.
Much attention has been paid to the delegate situations in Michigan and Florida. I want to provide some background for these states' decisions to schedule their contests in violation of party rules and some clarification regarding party rules.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties create a nomination contest "window." Both parties in 2008 set the date as February 5th. For the GOP, if a state scheduled their contest before that, then half of their delegates are removed from the convention. So, for the GOP, Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, South Carolina, Nevada, and Florida were only allocated half of their normal share of delegates. They have their punishment for early states already built into the rules.
The Democrats, meanwhile, don't have an established rule for how to handle states with contests outside of the window. The official 2008 rules only allow exemptions for Iowa and New Hampshire, due to their "traditional" status, and South Carolina and Nevada, which both applied for special exemptions and were provided them because of their large black and Hispanic populations, respectively. As we know, this year the party's rules and bylaws committee, which included 12 (out of 30)Clinton supporters, voted to strip Florida and Michigan of all of their delegates. The party also barred any candidates from campaigning in those two states and they also called on the candidates to even refuse to participate. The DNC placed the impetus to prevent the violation of party rules on not only its own enforcement mechanisms, but also on the candidates themselves.
I recently found a wormhole that allowed me to catch a glimpse of the future. My some rift in the time-space continuum I was able to watch CNN and other news coverage from 2010. I could also read diary-posts from MyDD, including those with the following titles: Hillary's Positive Case for the Nomination [Updated X 59]; Support Impeachment of Obama, the Devil in the Brooks Brothers Suit; How Hillary Can Still Win; and The Imposter in the White House.
Apparently, in 2010, Hillary's campaign for the Democratic Nomination is still going on as is now $189 million in debt. She is living full time in Kentucky and is leading the Appalachian Seccession movement, intent on becoming the Queen of an Independent Appalachia State. She was quoted as saying: "These are my hard working white people, and if I don't represent them who will. That is why we must secede from the United States. This is not about me, it is about hard working white people."
I don't know about you, but having had a glimpse of this future, I can only say I am so happy that our Hillary is still out there fighting for us in 2010, and refusing to concede to Obama even though he "won" the Presidency.
I don't know about you people, but I feel like Hillary is about to say "I'm ready for my close up, Mr. DeMille." That "Full Speed Ahead! Next Stop... West Virginia!" moment was almost painful. I felt that she was the only person in the room who did not get it. The pundits, after the speech, took a couple of secs to put on a good face for the loony tune moment. Notice the director in the clip below looks like none other than James Carville!
So this is an article that's about a week old, and I included it more as an example than anything else, as if anyone isn't aware of the age-related demographic split between the candidates. It got me wondering though:
What effect would the super delegates giving Clinton the victory have on the future of the democratic party, given how heavily young voters trend toward Obama? Do you think they'll stay politicized and continue their support of the democratic party? Will they forget/forgive? Perhaps when they get older will they see things the same way old folks do now, or would the future old people still disagree with today's old people? Damn, I think I wandered into time travel there...seems to happen a lot.
I'm genuinely curious how people see this election in the long run from a "10,000 miles up" view affecting the demographics of the democratic party in years to come. We can argue all day about Bosnia and Wright and all the other bullshit that pervades this site, but maybe someone is interested in taking a break and talking about this from a more analytical standpoint regarding the future of the democratic party.