A third view on FL and MI

First, I'll say that I'm not exactly pleased with how things came out today, although I'm not entirely sure that any solution would've made everyone happy. We all knew this was a very sticky situtaion going into today, and that someone was gonna get screwed over in the end.

But here's what I think. I've cooled down and tried to look at this from both sides, and this is the conclusion I've come to.

With regards to Florida, I expected what happened to happen. Did Florida do anything wrong? Not in my view. But this is the same penalty imposed by the RNC on FL, and puts us on equal footing with them. A half-seating of the delegation is not voter disenfranchisement, as a complete stripping would be. Florida at least does have a voice. And not all Congressmen and superdelegates from Florida are upset by this--some even said that they understood the argument that said that they broke the rules.

As far as Michigan goes, this was a much stickier situation, and it took longer to resolve. It may still not be resolved. I hope it is. I grow weary of this, and I fear that if it goes on any longer, then we'll come up with an even worse solution. As far as MI goes, I just can't understand blaming Obama for any of that. This was Sen. Levin's compromise, and the people around him making that compromise were people who are closer to their constituencies in Michigan than any of us could hope to be. They made a very honest effort to compromise for both campaigns. 69/59 is a far cry from not having a delegation seated at all, and it is not a 50/50 split either. I would've liked to see 73/55, and think that that would've been more in line with what their jurisdiction was.

But in the end, though, it doesn't matter what you and I think, unless you or I happen to be a voter in the states of Michigan and Florida. The initial reaction I get from people not on this site, but my friends in Michigan, at least (I have no Floridian buddies, sadly) is that they're happy that their delegation is seated and that their vote counts in some tangible way. Four delegates to them is not a dramatic altering of the vote, and 69/59 is prolly a lot closer representation of the will of the Michigan voters than having no seating or a 50/50 split would be. This was a true compromise between the two sides, and I think both gave up just about an even amount.

So we'll see if this was a good decision or not later on. The jury is still out on this one. We'll know in the next few weeks, when polling occurs of voters in Florida and Michigan, to see if they're happy or not. We'll see how the voters feel about it, because in the end, they're the folks that matter. We'll see if Michigan or Florida polling starts to swing more Democratic, which I believe it will. The voters will let their voices be heard, no matter which way that voice may go. Today does not please everyone, but to me, the day could've ended a lot worse. It could've ended better if you're a Clinton supporter or an Obama supporter, and that's what makes this a day of compromise.

As for the aftermath? We'll just wait and see.

< The Will of the People | Generational Warfare, Millennialists, "The New Politics", and The Youth Vote >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Math (none / 0) (#1)
    by VJCMAJD on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:58:19 AM EST
    Four delegates reallocated from one candidate to the other results in a negative eight-delegate difference against the would-be winner.  It does not disadvantage the would-be loser.