DNC Rules Committee

So the rules committee is meeting on 5/31 to decide the fate of the Michigan and Florida delegations. At the risk of sounding overly simplistic, perhaps the rules committee should resolve this issue by using, oh I don't know, the rules! First, let's examine how we arrived at this supposed impasse. The Democratic party has a history of allowing Iowa and New Hampshire and now Nevada and South Carolina, to be the initial primary proving grounds. These are the only four states that have been authorized to hold their primaries prior to Super Tuesday (2/5 this year). If anyone wants to debate the merits of why folks from Iowa or any of the other three states should have a louder voice in the nominating process, then we can certainly have a viable discssion on that point. However, the rules are what they are.

Michigan and Florida, being the natural rebels that they are, decided they didn't need to follow the DNC's rules and moved their primaries up prior to 2/5. In response, the DNC told them that if they went through with their plans, their delegations would not be seated at the National Convention in Denver. Our two rogue states called the DNC's bluff, most likely relying on their size and importance to bail them out of trouble with the DNC. All of the major candidates signed a pledge that they would not campaign in these states and knew full well that the penalties they would face is a loss of their delegates.

Instead of buckling to the states, the committee held true to their threat. Is it fair to the good people of Florida and Michigan? Absolutely not, but the people they should be blaming are their own state party leaders, not the DNC, not Howard Dean, and certainly not Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Speaking of Senator Clinton, does anybody outside of her inner circle and most delusional of backers believe her latest tirade about why they should be seated? She claims that this is as important as the Civil Rights movement, women's sufforage, etc. Why is it she has found this moral voice only after she fell behind Obama in delegates? Are we to believe that is just a coincidence?

Now we learn that "bus loads" of Clinton supporters will siege the DNC rules committee when they convene next week. The city's drugstores had better stock up on Preparation H and Metamucil. In all seriousness, I can sympathize with these women and their desire to see a female President. It will come, most likely sooner rather than later, but this was not Hillary's time. This is Obama's time. This is our time.

The delegations will ultimately be seated, because Obama (who's campaign will take the reigns of the DNC in short order) has said he wants them to be seated. The most likely scenario is to seat the full slate of delegates, but give each of them a half vote only. The repurcussions for the fall from this delegate battle aren't crystal clear yet, but I doubt they impact the race much at all. Obama's ticket will win Michigan pretty easily (unless McCain taps Romney as his Veep, in which case the state would be up for grabs). Obama will most likely lose to McCain in Florida, no matter how the delegates get seated.

Team Clinton might have been able to successfully move the goalposts around many times during the course of the campaign to help her define victory, but they will fail at trying to get the rule book changed in the middle of the fight. Goalposts are made to be moved in politics, which is a perceptions game. Mathematics, however, is not a matter of perception, so the rules committee will not side with her. It just won't happen.