either candidate backing out would solve the problem. except that obama is in the lead and, there’s actually no way that obama can lose his lead between now and the convention. clinton will remain behind from now on, even if she wins big in every state, she can’t make up obama’s pledged delegate lead.

so that’s why he won’t back out. he actually has a good chance of winning. clinton is still a long shot. she’s simply too far behind to catch up after her eleven consecutive losses last month.

yes, that was a potential amicable solution, except that FL at least has ruled out holding another primary. so the easy way out with that state is probably closed.

though I’d argue that since all the candidates were on the FL ballot though none campaigned, that’s a valid result.

except that clinton did kinda campaign there. she made appearances in florida, over the howls of the other candidates who complied with the DNC’s stupid no-campaigning rule. at that time clinton was still assuming she would be the nominee. she did her non-campaigning campaigning with an eye towards the general election, under the theory that floridians would be pissed off at the dems for ignoring them during the primary.

that’s just it, both florida and michigan open a host of messy issues. i hope susie is right that dean will broker some deal to avoid it. that’s certainly a possibility. but another way to avoid it is to have clinton drop out. as someone who thinks they’re both good candidates (though i do like obama better), i’m more worried about having a train wreck of a convention, especially considering the democrats’ unlimited knack for screwing stuff up.

Right, the superdelegate rules have been in place for years- ever since the last time the precincts chose the candidate, in 1972.

no. the superdelegate system we have now are a product of the 1982 hunt commission. the theory was that the move to the primary and caucus system in 1972 produced a string of bad democratic candidates and so the party wanted to increase the role of party insiders. the idea was that the insiders would have better judgment than the stupid voter in choosing a viable candidate. (which is a pretty ironic thing for a party that calls itself “democratic” to do)

originally, in 1984 superdelegates were 14% of the total number of delegates. but that number has steadily increased so that now it’s about 20%.

You know what else has been in place for years? A Democratic Party carving slices of pork for the military-industrial complex and describing people like Chavez and Castro as “brutal dictators”. A party that ran Liebermann for VP and co-starred Tipper Gore in the ever-popular anti-sex Christian moralizing role. While arrests for smoking pot went nowhere but up every year of the Clinton administration and we became the biggest police state in the world.

And they wonder why young people don’t vote.

In 1972 the Democrats had a chance to make me a lifelong party worker. I really like the county convention and district meetings. What they did instead was to torpedo McGovern, change the rules to give people like Scoop Jackson more power, and, locally, elect a former Air Force man as state senator, who eventually resigned because he, uh, hadn’t lived in the district for years.

Sorry, but if the superdelegates over-rule the precincts and primaries, it’s all a spectator sport to me.

Which can be avoided if the candidates decide there doesn’t have to be one. The DNC rules allow for MI and FL to hold their primaries again, though I’d argue that since all the candidates were on the FL ballot though none campaigned, that’s a valid result. Obama’s decision to withdraw from Michigan doesn’t look so favorable to him now.

huh? susie did you read what i wrote above? i’m not saying that “insisting to win” is what threatens to hurt the democratic primary. as i said above, a contested primary is a healthy thing. there’s nothing wrong with that. the problem is really about things that are unique to this year: (a) the fact that superdelegates could determine the outcome (something that has never happened since the current system was created), and (b) the DNC’s stupid decision to penalize MI and FL for moving their primaries.

they are both potential train wrecks which can only be avoided if the contest gets resolved before the convention, as it has every single other year prior to this one. clinton cannot win without a floor fight at this point. and unless clinton drops out, as of tomorrow, obama probably won’t be able to either. which means the party is heading for two major messes at once.

it’s not the staying per se. i certainly have no problem with a contested primary in and of itself. the problem is that after today it isn’t likely that either candidate will have a win or loss that will count as definitive. thus after today there won’t really be a good excuse for either to drop out. on top of that, it is virtually certain that neither candidate will get enough pledged delegates to put him or her over the top between now and the convention. that means both that: (1) the race could be decided by superdelegates, and (2) there will probably be a really messy and contentious floor fight at the convention over the seating of the florida and michigan delegates. both #1 and #2 will seriously harm the party’s chances in the general election as whatever happens will be viewed as illegitimate by the losing side.

in the end we all have to come together and defeat mccain. a win that is viewed as illegitimate will cause a lot more harm that a regular contested primary.

oh, i agree, maybe something really bad will come out of the rezko thing, or maybe not. (how serious the rezko thing is, like every other criticism of obama and/or clinton, seems to depend on how much the reporter/commentator likes or dislikes the candidate) and yet if this primary battle gets determined by the superdelegates or ends up in a floor fight over seating the MI and FL delegates, it will be a major mess, probably costing the democratic candidate’s electability quite a bit. if clinton doesn’t drop out before the convention, that mess will probably happen.

in other words, even if the rezko thing does prove to be a problem for obama, it doesn’t make any of the points about how clinton staying in would be a disaster any less valid.

While I was home sick, I read over the articles about the case and had several unanswered questions of my own. For instance: When he bought the additional land from Rezko’s property, he had the 10-foot strip appraised at somewhere around $40K. But he insisted on paying Rezko much more - $100K, I think. He came to that number by dividing the price of the lot into sixths, because he bought 1/6.

Now, I happen to think he was probably trying to be extremely fair and scrupulous. I really do. But there’s also a reasonable case to be made that the extra $60K was actually a way to launder money. I’m not saying it was, I’m only noting that as a reporter, I know how federal prosecutors - and reporters - tend to look at these things.

At the very least, it was poor judgment. The guy was already under investigation at that point. So no, it’s not out of the question that Obama will be the wrong candidate by the time we get to the convention.

i agree with you until this sentence. you’re right that we don’t know what will happen, and no one can foresee how something unexpected could completely change the race. but that doesn’t mean that we can’t see looming disasters that probably will happen if no unforeseen events get in the way. having superdelegates determine the outcome, a floor fight, or a fight over seating the michigan and florida delegates are all potential disasters for the democratic party. sure, maybe something will happen between then and now that could change that. but that doesn’t make it less of a looming disaster.

put another way, if you’re standing in the middle of the street and a bus is coming at you, you should move out of the way. just because it’s possible that a truck could come out of nowhere and smash into the charging bus, stopping it before it hits you, doesn’t mean that you still shouldn’t move out of the way. the truck is a possibility, but i wouldn’t bet my life on it.