Newt Gingrich's Advice

In today's Wall Street Journal, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich offers some new and unneeded advice to the Democratic Party. He says our presidential nominee, whichever is selected, will be "tainted" following a "divisive and delegitimatized" contest. Newt doesn't want delegates elected by voters in Florida and Michigan to be seated at the convention this coming August. And he doesn't like superdelegates either, suggesting that these long-time Democrats who work day in and day out for the party and working people are somehow illegitimate.

Newt says that "Democrats are caught in a double-bind: Disenfranchising the voters in Michigan and Florida while allowing party insiders to pick the party's nominee has all the makings of a Democratic civil war."

It's not surprising that Newt is interested in the Democratic presidential race, considering how most of the nation has more interest in the Clinton-Obama contest than in John McCain's eager but unconsummated embrace on the Republican side of the extreme right. But unlike most of us, who think the two Democratic finalists are engaged in one of the most memorable and dynamic campaigns in history, Newt thinks we've descended into "a slog."

Some slog. Democrats are proud of the campaign. We want a competition, not a coronation. Our leading candidates are offering clear choices and strong leadership to reverse the disastrous course that George W. Bush and his Republicans allies in Congress have set for our country.

There is more than a little irony in reading Newt Gingrich discussing concepts such as integrity, unity and legitimacy. They are not qualities he has championed in the past. Instead, his modus operandi has always been fostering division, sowing discontent and undermining the will of the people. His "Contract on America," which led to the Republican Party's on-going economic war against the middle class, should have defined him for all time.

So, of all the people in this world, I think the last one Democrats will listen to is Newt Gingrich.

Even on the merits, he's got it wrong. He suggests that the solution "for the integrity of the process, is a do-over. Hold the Michigan and Florida Democratic Primaries again." There is another solution, one that makes far more sense in terms of producing a legitimate outcome at the Democratic convention: Seat the delegates Florida and Michigan selected on primary day.

Senators Clinton and Obama, as well as former Senator Edwards -- complied with the rules and refrained from active campaigning in both states. Democrats in both states turned out and voted in huge numbers. They want a new direction for this country. We should make sure their vote is counted and that it counts for something.

I certainly hope Newt Gingrich doesn't take his advice seriously, because Democrats don't. If I were offering advice to Newt, it would be to spend more time rebuilding his own tattered party, rather than telling us how to run ours. He should try to get Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter to make peace with John McCain. Now that's a civil war.

Comments

[larry278]

This won't be the 1st time that the former Speaker of the US's House of Reprentatives, Newt Gingrich, has been wrong. SS/DD.

[magnusreputo]

Nonsense. With only Clinton's name on the ballot in Michigan, how can seating the delegates be fair? Also, Clinton did go to Florida.

[Thatcher]

(continued from previous post)

There needs to be a "do over" or something on the same line ... or out of kindness - if it appears their delegates don't change the outcome - let them be seated.

A legitimate outcome is one where everyone has followed the rules that were laid out beforehand.

What if a group of people wanted to organize and their vote was to be held on June 5. However, management somehow gets people to commit on June 3 to not organize and have a list of those workers. When you hold your vote, those people don't come forward to vote because "They've already committed". You wouldn't count their commitments would you? No, you wouldn't. They have to vote on June 5 to be counted. It's the same situation here.

Since those 2 elections were invalid for the process - the only real remedy left is to hold a new contest (either a primary or a caucus) paid for by the 2 state parties who broke the rules. That is how they will be held accountable.

[DemandTruth]

You'd have a point, except for in Florida it was the REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED legislature that broke the rules and moved up the primary. Democrats didn't have any control over it, as they were outvoted by the Republican majority. The Republicans disenfranchised ALL of us Democrats in Florida. WE didn't break the rules, THEY did. And we were punished. Even so, I wouldn't mind if they decided to seat the delegates as-is. But Michigan has to be a different story, as voters weren't given a choice. Hillary's name was the only one on the ballot. They would HAVE to have a re-vote if their delegates were to seat.

[Thatcher]

All but one state house member voted for moving up the date ... on both sides of the aisle ... here are links to articles from 3 Florida newspapers in early 2007. If you will notice, the Democratic representatives were not only complicit, but conspiratory in this whole process.

Your state Party, your state representatives all did your state the disservice - No one else.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2007/03/house_votes_to_.html

TALLAHASSEE – Hoping to muscle Florida into a preeminent role in picking next year's Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, the state House voted 115-1 today to leapfrog almost all the other states and set a Jan. 29 primary, with an option to go even earlier.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/09/State/Dems__primary_may_not.shtml

Florida Democratic chairwoman Karen Thurman and state executive director Leonard Joseph have been meeting with national party leaders this week to reach an agreement on how to deal with the Democratic National Committee penalties for violating the national party's scheduling rules.

"Possibilities include accepting the Jan. 29th date and the penalties that go along with it or holding a party-run caucus at a later date, " Thurman said in an e-mail to Democrats on Tuesday.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/06/13/State/Florida_primary_will_.shtml

The rules, unanimously passed in 2006 by nearly 450 Democratic party activists across the country - including Florida - are clear and leave little or no leeway for Dean to waive them: Any state that violates the schedule set by the DNC loses half its delegates to the national nominating convention and any candidate who campaigns in that state will forfeit all delegates from that state.

http://www.jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/032107/D8O0PVN02.shtml

The Florida Senate is waiting to see what happens in other states before moving forward with a date, said Sen. Jeremy Ring, D-Margate, who is leading the effort in that chamber.

"It gives us a chance to really watch the landscape," Ring said. "When we're done Florida will be relevant."

[Thatcher]

Mr. McEntee -

Yes, the voters played by the rules ... the candidates, for the most part, played by the rules. Neither groups should be held responsible for the fiasco that is now at hand with these two states.

The party leaders in both states understood what would occur should they NOT comply with the rules laid before them by their leaders at the DNC. The party leaders went ahead and BROKE THE RULES.

For the other 48 states who did follow the rules ... for the voters in the other 48 states who did follow the rules ... for the candidates who have played by the rules in those other 48 states - HOW IS IT RIGHT to allow those delegates be seated in those 2 states?

NO ONE ... and I repeat NO ONE ... who has promoted the idea that FL and MI should be seated to be "fair" to the voters in two states have come up with an response about how this is NOT fair to those who played by the rules.

The problem is the leaders in those 2 states thought they could get away with something and THEY (not the national party, not the voters, not the candidates) have cost the voters of their states their representation. If anyone should be calling for action - it should be the voters of those 2 states calling for the resignation of their party leaders in those two state for causing this to happen. And the voters asking for a way to make this right.

If these two states are allowed to be seated as is ... then there is NOTHING ... I REPEAT ... NOTHING to stop other state parties from making their own rules and following their own "destinies" in the future presidential process. Otherwise if you think this year is a mess with the problem of 2 states - imagine when 50 states decide "well, we don't have to follow the rules ... let's position ourselves no matter what chaos may ensue."

(continued next post)