BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 08:28 AM

'I've heard the "superdelegates" described as "adult supervision".'


                When you see and hear Obama supporters, it all makes sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 10:09 AM

"adult supervision" Maybe that's what that uperdelegate Spitzer was actually involved in...

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 10:14 AM

That's probably going to be his defense. He's taken it upon himself to go undercover and investigate a filthy prostitution ring, and his political enemies are trying to make something else out of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Amos
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 11:41 AM

I really fail to see why you act so snide because Obama's supporters act enthusiastic, Rig. Are you jaded and cynical from overly-hard experience, or is it natural to you?

Hillary's supporters also scream and chant and holler at her rallies. In my opinion, for them, it is more about her as a woman than the notion that positive new conditions might arise therefrom, but maybe I am biased.

The expertise at rhetoric -- an honorable art that used to be part of every young adult's education -- which Obama demonstrates is not to be dismissed as shallow word-play. It is not. It is a demonstration of the ability to direct people's attention to exciting and optimistic plans. A leader who can do that, who also has an inbred sense of ethics and honesty, is a package that should not be walked away from.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 12:50 PM

Yes, well I'll admit that Hillary's supporter don't make a lot more sense than Obama's, but at least they appear to be older.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 02:48 PM

Is that such a good thing? I'd imagine there are probably just as many older people at Obama's rallies as at Clinton's, it's just that there are more young people there as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Peace
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 02:54 PM

"Yes, well I'll admit that Hillary's supporter don't make a lot more sense than Obama's, but at least they appear to be older."

Look at the age demographics for the election of GW Bush. Age don't mean a damned thing, imo. It does not equate to brains, good decision-making or anything else. It is possible to be young and stupid. It's also possible to be old and stupid. We prove that time and time again.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 03:09 PM

While it's possible to be old and stupid--Ronald Reagan comes to mind--it seems to me that it's more probable to be young and stupid. At least, looking backwards.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 03:53 PM

Remember the last young guy? Charisma but no brains? His term was cut short before he did real damage. The Bay of Pigs was a belly laugh around the world.

(His assasination was deplorable and tragic- I am referring only to his abilities)

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 05:22 PM

Wasn't Clinton younger than Kennedy? (They were both a good bit older than Teddy Roosevelt, mind you.)

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 05:28 PM

Yeah, I was commenting on the ages of the supporters, actually. A major part of Obama's support originates on college campuses.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Amos
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 05:32 PM

While age brings a certain wiliness, it sometimes comes at the cost of losing one's hope, energy for new ideas, and ability to change.

We're due for some renewal.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 06:46 PM

Electoral numerology thoughts:

People keep saying that it'll be down to the undecided super delegates to decide - but in fact, with the delegates he's got now, plus the super delegates who have indicated they will back him, if Obama gets just 50% of the delegates in the remaining primaries and caucuses, he will be over the winning line, without needing any of the undecided super delegates.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 07:41 PM

I guess it all depends on Pennsylvania.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 07:51 PM

Even if Clinton does remarkably well in Pennsylvania, she's pretty unlikely to stop Obama getting that 50% of the delegates in the primaries that are still to come. In which case, even if they could swing it to pull in the Michigan and Florida primaries, it wouldn't make any difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 07:56 PM

That Wyoming caucus with all of 8700 Democratic voters was a real joke. The Republican caucus was closed, probably just a few big shots and a big poker game. A state small in population, but 500,000 citizens nonetheless.
Yes, Pennsylvania will be very important.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Amos
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 08:16 PM

Why do you say it was a joke, Q?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 08:26 PM

So it was 8,700 this year. A bit up on 2004 when the total number in the Wyoming caucus was 675.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 08:45 PM

But still ridiculous.
In no way representative of the population.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Mar 08 - 10:39 PM

Frankly, I'm a little dissapointed. Wasn't Wyoming the first state in the union to allow women to vote?

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: DougR
Date: 12 Mar 08 - 08:16 PM

Q:Mail ballots have been used for several years in Arizona and, to my knowledge, no complaints have been made. (I should add, however, that Arizonans are extremely honest folks).

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Mar 08 - 09:38 PM

Oregon does all of its elections by mail. I haven't heard of many complaints, and there have been a number of scoundrels here.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 12 Mar 08 - 10:00 PM

Just read about the Oregon system- thanks for the note.
It may be the way to go in the future.
It does require optical scanning, a good records system, plus public education, and could not be put in place in a short time period, so could not be used in Fl-MI before the Convention date.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 08:29 AM

I'd have thought that setting up polling stations for a few hours would be less of a hassle than a massive mailshot.   After all, it's not a very complicated kind of election, only two candidates and pick which one you want. Pencil and paper does it.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 09:38 AM

Ummmmmm, what is to prevent the Repubs from votin' in a mail in Dem primary???

I mean, the Repubs in Florida, and probably in Michigan, would rather have Clinton as the nominee than Obama so is that all that democratic either???

Doesn't this give the Repubs a license to meddle???

Just asking...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Amos
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 09:46 AM

Ballots get mailed OUT from the registration rolls. Only registered Dems get Dem primary ballots, and likewise for Repubs. To cross-corrupt as you describe wouold require forging the ballots forms. At least that is how I have seen it work in the past.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 01:15 PM

Information on the Oregon system here from the Oregon Blue Book.
Voting

MacGrath, note that Oregon citizens voted for the method, which was then approved by the state Legislature. I am sure that it took several months at least to codify the regulations so that they would be essentially fail-safe. Whatever system is used is subject to State laws and control, and cannot be instituted overnight.

I agree with Amos (I think) that mail voting may be practical and efficient. It will take time to get agreement on any change, so I do not look for any real improvement on the current chaos for some years.

Macgrath, any vote, primary or general election, would be subject to rules set up by the State for voting. If a state has instituted machine voting, it probably would require a vote by the assembled Legislature to change the method. (most legislatures have a summer recess, there are rules for calling them together, etc.). Every state (50 of them) has its own rules, methods of registration, etc., and sets dates for the primaries or elections.
This is what set up the problem with Michigan and Florida. The political parties set rules on timing which the states (always jealous of their prerogatives) ignored and set their own dates. Which should rule? The States are legal entities that enact laws under the Constitution. The political parties do not have any authority to make laws. Can the Democratic National Committee overrule state law? I think that this will be a subject for the courts and the U. S. Congress in the next few years. It needs settling.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 02:21 PM

What right has a legislature got to messing about with the arrangements for an internal party election? That's the kind of thing that happens in dictatorships and suchlike. One of the basic criteria for a democracy is that parties are not at the beck and call of the government.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 03:11 PM

The Legislature and the State also decide who will be on the ballots and whether write-in is valid.
Yes, it is complicated.
The UK and Canadian systems are so much simpler.
In Canada, parties select a leader. He is their spokesman, leads their party in the Legislature. He, like the other legislative members, has been elected by the electorate of his province. In an election, if his party wins, he becomes prime minister; if not, he remains in the Legislature as a leader of 'the loyal opposition. If he is voted out in his province, he may quit, or elect to run in a secure riding from which that member withdraws. This is oversimplified, but may help Americans understand the more straight-forward system in Canada.

The states that came together to form the United States reserved many facets of governance- forming the Union involved compromises.
Systems thus are not uniform.

Dictatorships are in NO way similar; they would tell the states to conform or else!

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 03:20 PM

The issue here isn't the complication. Nothing wrong with a bit of complication. But once again, by what right does a legislature tell an ostensibly independent political party how it should run its internal elections?

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: PoppaGator
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 03:38 PM

The states finance the primary elections, that's why...

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 04:26 PM

In Florida, the governor is Republican. He and the party are laughing themselves silly over the actions of Screamer Dean and the convolutions of the Democrats. Without the jaybird's OK, no revote can be held. I just caught the tail end in a news broadcast, but after indicating it would cost millions, the speaker (Atty. Gen.?) didn't seem to offer anything of substance.
Florida is secure for McCain because of this.

Dunno what MI Dems will do. Probably wait and fight it out at the Convention. If they don't get a satisfactory settlement, McCain may carry MI on the backs of the disgruntled.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 07:12 PM

The states finance the primary elections, that's why..

And that's quite an expensive bargain for political parties to have accepted, if it means stuff like "Legislature and the State also decide who will be on the ballots and whether write-in is valid." And this whole nonsense about the way the legislatures gratuitously and irresponsibly imposed an invalid primary on the Democratic party, and on the voters.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 07:38 PM

Eventually Federal courts will decide whether the state has the right- and responsibility- to set rules for the primary, including a date. It seems to me that the Democratic National Committee is the one that is acting invalidly.

I have been secretary-tresurer or on the governing body of several societies, both in the United States and Canada. I don't know the rules for private societies in the UK, but the societies act set up by the state or provincial government imposes very strict rules on how a society is governed, including provision for election of officers at set times, rules on membership and set procedures for their implementation, annual audit by a certified accountant, etc., etc. Changes in procedures must be advertised in advance, and approved by majority vote. Expenditures must be approved by at least two signing officers. All of the requirements are in the Societies Acts, and thus are imposed on the 'private' societies by an arm of the government. A lawyer who is a member usually acts without charge to interpret the rules if the officers are unsure of some legal point.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 11:07 PM

Q--

You are an excellent researcher of folk music.

But as seems often the case when you hold forth on US politics , your schadenfreude seems to have gotten in the way of your thought processes.

It is quite likely, I'd guess, that neither the MI nor the FL delegates, chosen in unsanctioned votes, against the express wishes of the DNC, will be seated. And there will be no revote--at least in FL, where the Democratic members of the state House of Representatives released a statement Tuesday which said: "Our House delegation in opposed to a mail-in campaign or any redo of any sort". Unless they back off bigtime, those sound like final chords.

But MI is a state in economic distress. It's unlikely that McCain's prescription--some job training and lower taxes--will be enough to offset the real pain Michigan voters are feeling--especially since health care costs are an issue. So the Democrat--Hillary or Obama--is likely to take Michigan in the fall. Your schadenfreude, sorry to say, can't substitute for your missing logic.

FL--who knows? I would bet Obama has a good chance--again, if his economic proposals, especially towards universal health care---but without Hillary's "mandate"--appeal. Again, the contrast will be with what McCain offers--and his conservative base will make sure any proposed government program is modest. And there will be a desire for more--which he won't offer.

Also, as I've pointed out before, Hillary's strongest supporters want above all else to prevent a Republican from naming any more Supreme Court justices. So they will back Obama if he is the nominee.

Your rapture over US election-year chaos and your rather blatant, inexplicable--(baffling since you're not even a US voter)---and unjustified-- dislike of Obama may have to be modified.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 11:08 PM

"...delegation is opposed..."

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 11:44 PM

Of course they are opposed- there is no way that the Legislature and governor in Florida will permit another vote. Not even if they said pretty please.

I don't 'dislike' Obama, I don't believe that he can defeat McCain. As I said in a post somewhere, he is running eigh years too soon.
I believe Clinton has a better chance of defeating McCain, but it will be close either way.

And your qualifications are? I will admit that I don't know much, but my family was into the fray as delegates and campaigners in years past, so I have some basic understanding of the process. I now live in Canada, but I still have my Texas poll tax receipt.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 05:11 PM

I thought I'd check how the delegate count would be if the Democrats had a winner-takes-all rule in this. Surprisingly little difference, but it would give Obama a bigger lead.

The current count for elected delegates (BBC site) is 1596 for Obama and 1484 for Clinton - Obama leading by 112 delegates.

With winner-takes-all it'd be Obama with 1564 and Clinton with 1360 - Obama leading by 204.

And if the superdelegates all went with their states, from the ones which have so far voted, Obama would have 306, and Clinton would have 287.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 05:15 PM

Correction - the figures I gave for elected delegate was that for all delegates pledged so far, including superdelegates.

For elected delegates only it should have been Obama with 1368 and Clinton with 1226, Obama leading by 142.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 09:55 PM

Q--

You don't dislike Obama. Interesting, then, that I've never seen any positive reference to him by you--perhaps I've missed them and you can refer me to your positive comments. And I've seen a boatload of negative remarks by you about him and his chances. Sometimes you seem to be one of the Gloom and Doom Trio---Rig, Janet, and you.

I don't claim to be the ultimate authority--on anything. But some of your pronouncements on US politics seem to have both an air of undeserved authority and a sizable dose of schadenfreude, as I noted.

As I noted, it is not at all clear that McCain would take either Michigan or Florida, against Obama, at any rate--for the reasons I cited.

Against Hillary, who knows?--she would be a much weaker opponent-- she'd get very few independents and basically zero Republicans. And if you think the black community would support her after the vile campaign she is now running, I have several bridges to sell you.   

But if you have a logical argument why McCain would take either Florida or Michigan against Obama, I'd be curious to hear it.

And if you really think Hillary would be a stronger opponent for McCain nationally, especially after alienating a good chunk of the Democratic coalition, I'd like to hear your theory.

My main source of information is the Wall St Journal--and so far I've never heard of a better source---(reporting, not editorials, of course).

And I'll be watching for positive comments about Obama by you.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 09:58 PM

Interestingly, it now looks like there may in fact be some sort of a revote in Michigan--but not in Florida.

But there's many a slip....

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 10:01 PM

"But if you have a logical argument why McCain would take either Florida or Michigan against Obama, I'd be curious to hear it."


                   This Hispanic vote!

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 10:03 PM

"And I'll be watching for positive comments about Obama by you."


                     He makes a great first impression!

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Mar 08 - 10:53 PM

Rig--

You seem to have conveniently forgotten that the Republican party is not in good repute with Hispanics at this point. There is not even a united front in the Cuban-Americans--some--especially of the young-- feel relations with Cuba should be improved--and that we have a chance with the new regime there.

And the FL snowbirds and retirees etc. who are far more concerned about health care costs than you seem to realize, are not likely to be impressed by McCain's "market-based solutions".

You're good at simplistic answers. But someday you should look below the surface. Politics is fascinating--but not easily understood with bumper-sticker slogans, which seems to be your strong suit (along with Smears R Us, of course).

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Mar 08 - 12:02 AM

Detroit Free Press today said any revote plan would have to be approved by the Legislature by the end of next week. Clinton says she is not opposed to a do-over election. Obama said he would accept any "fair" resolution to the issue.
Vote by end of next week? Lots of unhappy campers in the Legislature. Nice if it happens but I doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Mar 08 - 12:24 AM

In an earlier editorial, the Detroit Free Press condemmed the Dem honchos who caused the mess.

"In the end, Michigan made the point it was trying to make with the Jan. 15 primary: that the nominating process' absurd fealty to Iowa and New Hampshire is wrong and needs addressing. If making the point costs one of the Democratic contenders the nomination, so be it. [My italics]. And if the party leadership can't work something out to recognize Michigan, well Republican nominee John McCain will have a great opening line for every speech he makes in Michigan: "It's great to be here in a state the Democrats say doesn't count.""
".....Democrats would do well to focus less on party rules and more on winning elections."
(Recognize Michigan's primary," editorial, March 7, 2008, Detroit Free Press).
The newspaper also deplored the fact that neither Obama nor Clinton choose to visit and speak during the primary.

Can the damage be repaired?

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Mar 08 - 03:43 PM

Can the damage be repaired? Of course. It's March. And Michigan voters, being sensible humans, not fools who hold a senseless grudge-- (about a primary that yielded no delegates for them) --forever, will listen to what the Democratic nominee and the Republican nominee say--and vote for the one they think will help their own economic situation.

Regardless of whether a primary "that counts" is ever actually held.

And, as I said, McCain is hemmed in by his own base from offering much in the way of help for Michigan people in economic distress--or people outside Michigan.

Subject: RE: BS: Dem Convention Repeat of '24???
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 08 - 04:47 PM

Holding those primaries early was a gamble that the rules would be changed to reverse the known policy - when you gamble sometimes you lose. And you don't gripe about it.