Reply #84: ****((((( PART 3 AND 4 )))))**** [View All]

[indimuse]

*3) There are people of strong prejudice and limited means but strong popularity (Brazile), and then there are the charlatans. One such charlatan is the Rev. Sharpton, whose action network is advocating the line, that counting MI and FL is direct theft of those votes, which were never cast.
Among all the arguments made in the press, this is by far the stupidest, most useless, and based on the greatest emotional appeal. I don’t expect anyone to make it at the May 31st meeting, but the media will try. My response to this inane logic, is this:

a- for every imagined Obama voter who did not vote, one can easily imagine Clinton voters who did not vote. Such imagining, when taken to its logical extreme, can be applied to every single election ever held on earth, from Roman times, to present. If you just imagine a better turn out in Florida of 2000, Gore could have won. If you just imagine a better turn out for the Communists in 1933 Germany, Hitler would never have won the Reichstag. If you just imagine… well, elections are fundamentally based on opposition to the imagination. They are metrical, tallied, and thrive on assumptions such as one man one vote at one time for one candidate. For every imagined Black who did not vote for Obama, there is an imagined Latino and Asian - you choose- who slept in on Clinton.

I realize Axelrod’s campaign thrives on the imagined. From imagined “grassroots” to imagined “victims,” but disenfranchising 2.4 million voters, requires no imagination.

b- This argument ignores, conveniently, that the Democratic Parties of both states, encouraged turn-out, and at no point did the DNC discourage it. Neither the Parties nor the DNC ever or even suggested replacement elections could possibly be held, and not a single FL and MI voter was under the impression that they had a choice in the matter. Voters’ options were simple, either vote now or you don’t vote at all. If you don’t vote, there wasn’t a single message or promise from anyone that you’d be given another chance to cast your ballot. This was 100% clear!

Obama bombarded the Florida election market, and while he didn’t show up in person, at no point whatsoever did he hold out the hope of another re-vote. In Michigan he promoted voting uncommitted. If some Blacks and college students, contrary to what was obvious, want to lie that they didn’t show up in FL and MI because of the DNC ban, then logically, they failed to heed their Leader- who was paying serious money for a messages getting them out to vote!

*4) Compromise.
We can compromise on delegate numbers within very narrow constraints. Neither cutting the delegates by half, nor playing around with the voter turnout and numbers, is politically acceptable. Any such shenanigans amount to further dilution of the one man one vote rule. You cannot accept one person’s votes, while rejecting another’s. This is a fantasy option, which only occurs in nightmares. It spells defeat for Clinton, and democracy along with it. It is not the position Clinton takes, nor should her supporters. Votes must be recognized, exactly as they were cast.

In conclusion. There are three choices before the Rule Committee on May 31st. Stall (fail), approve, and re-vote. Here is how I speculate the outcome.

The Clinton camp, made repeated attempts to offer Florida and Michigan a re-vote. Contraty to DNC rules, and to what Dean and Pelosi maintained, Axelrod declined every single opportunity. His drive to disenfranchise both states, was determined. It was an illegal disenfranchisement, and there are no two ways about it. Still, a re-vote can be put on the table. It may be the only acceptable solution to the impasse.

Unfortunately, Axelrod knows his demographics, and strategy. He understands that a re-vote is both a political defeat of his candidate, and that the demographics will not budge. He would be taking a big risk, hoping for an outcome even marginally more favorable to Obama, than that already tallied for MI and FL in January.

Approval, will be very difficult for the Rules committee to approve MI and FL on May 31st. Approval amounts to admission of sins, and confessions will be in order. I don’t expect the political wherewithal for approval. Clinton proxies need to win the argument, without expecting a decision. Had the committee met on June 4th, this may have been different, but May 31st is too early, for a Primary hinging on the Puerto Rico popular vote.

The most likely outcome for May 31st, will be nothing politically, but by documenting a Rhetorical victory, Clinton can carry it over to the next meeting, when her popular vote will provide the wherewithal for more courageous decision making. I may be wrong, this is just guessing the future, but there is no guessing the argument, and Clinton supporters are 1000% correct, to fight on behalf of FL and MI.