Thursday, April 24, 2008

Arguments for continued stalemate

Today, I've seen many arguments in favor of "forcing" the superdelegates to decide upon a nominee before the convention. I would like to offer a few arguments against a rush to judgment -- and I hope to find wording acceptable to both the pro-Hillary and pro-Obama camps.

1. Bickering will continue. The pledge of a superdelegate is not written in stone. These people are free to change their minds. Instead of reconciling themselves to the chosen one, partisans of the losing candidate will maintain the rancorous public debate in the hope of turning a few supers.

2. An unforeseen event may decide the issue. One candidate or the other may make a major gaffe. Or a hitherto-closeted skeleton may come tumbling out into public view. At that point, the supers will quickly decide in favor of the gaffe-free, non-skeletonized candidate, and the partisans of the loser will accept defeat much more readily than they would otherwise

3. The Republicans must withhold fire. Right now, McCain must campaign in a general way against both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The truly negative attacks won't begin until the GOP can target a single candidate.

Republican propaganda wars are often WWI-style wars of attrition: The battle begins afresh every day, day after day, wearing the enemy down slowly. Time is on their side. Why start the general election season earlier than necessary?

4. Florida and Michigan. The fairest choice, in my view, would be a revote. Right now, that option is off the proverbial table, but things may change. Obama probably would have done well in Michigan had he participated the first time around; now, many sense buyer's remorse.

There are other reasons to withhold judgment, but those four will do for now.

By the way: Aglachel's piece on Obama is one of the wisest analysis of this election anyone has thus far cyber-penned.
Obama has chosen a political strategy of blaming voters for failing to vote for him rather than correcting himself to be more appealing to them. Key in this is to declare anyone who fails to vote for him a racist, as if this were the only reason someone could fail to support him. This says a great deal about the candidate's psychology, but that's really between him and his shrink. What matters is the effect this has on voters.

I don't think the majority of Obama supporters...really grasps the damage that has been done with the false claims of rampant racism
.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can't believe you are calling this...this...nonsense "wisest analysis"
Honestly!
Let me count the ways you have changed my friend....
ohhh never mind!

Anonymous said...

1. Depends on the margin of victory. Of course, *some* bickering will continue no matter what happens.

2. True. But so what? Maybe such a moment will not come. Maybe it will come in September. On the other hand we'll continue to see plenty of make-believe "gaffes" and "skeletons" which aren't particularly helpful to anyone.

3. Maybe. Republicans aren't stupid. They can start attacking as soon as they are pretty sure who they're facing. I tend to think the Pubs are holding their fire now because they don't want to distract the Dems from kneecapping themselves.

4. I agree that would be fairest. I don't think the Obama campaign is going to agree to trade a 95% chance of primary victory for a 70% chance. They should, but who is gonna make them? And of course nobody wants to pay for the revotes.

I have a strong suspicion that the supers are going to decide this in June without anyone "forcing" the issue. That way the convention can be the pep rally we've come to expect.

Peace,

Anonymous said...

from a union member, white, blue collar male who lives in the north east, i was an Edwards fanatic now turned to sitting on the fence and watching the sheer lunacy that is taking hold of the democratic party. i never thought that i would support Mrs. Clinton as i'm not a fan of aristocracies but she seems to be the only candidate left with a substantive message. Obama is an eloquent speaker when it comes to defending himself, and talking 'bout "change" and "unity" but that's about it. (change gonna come regardless, and fuck unity, i wanna see some republican heads roll.)his followers make me ashamed to consider myself a lifelong ultra liberal democrat. these people who have just "joined" the party are ruining any chance of there becoming a democrat potus. they have alienated so many people who've been here long before them, that come election day and Mr. Obama is our candidate two things will either happen. 1. people will stay home. 2. theyll vote to spite their own party. this coming from a surfer dude talking politics with my fellow brothers who are gun carrying, god fearing people, while on picket lines. Joe, youre doing a great service to your party by calling a spade a spade, preach on brother man.

Gary McGowan said...

"Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it." -George Santayana

LESSONS FOR DENVER: FDR's 1932 Victory Over London's Wall Street Fascists

http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/03/29/lessons-denver-fdrs-1932-victory-over-londons-wall-street-fa.html

AitchD said...

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" is how it goes. I wish he'd written "Those who ignore the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat them'.

I didn't believe in reincarnation in any of my former lives, so why should I believe in it now?