Moving Clinton's Goalposts, Again

Has anyone noticed the resemblance between George McGovern and Robert Mugabe? Sen. Hillary Clinton and her inventive mathematicians have. They see a parallel between the longtime dictator of Zimbabwe and the heroic former South Dakota senator, who won the 1972 presidential nomination while losing the popular vote in Democratic primaries.

The Clinton's campaign latest lurch into creative arithmetic currently awards her a popular-vote victory. This zigzag continues to ignore violation of party rules in Michigan and Florida and also requires speed-dial deletion of previous campaign statements deriding and devaluing the popular vote.

Now it requires comparing McGovern and Mugabe. "We're seeing that right now in Zimbabwe," the senator told a retirement community in Florida Wednesday. "Tragically, an election was held, the president lost and they refused to abide by the will of the people." This sounds like what happened in 1972, when Zimbabwe was still Rhodesia and Hillary and her husband were working in McGovern's campaign.

Almost 16 million voters cast ballots in Democratic primaries that year. McGovern had won early primaries, but Sen. Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota won large victories among working-class Democrats in Ohio and Pennsylvania. When the primaries ended, Humphrey had 25.8 percent of the popular vote and McGovern 25.3 percent, a margin of fewer than 68,000 votes. (Alabama Gov. George Wallace finished third with 23.5 percent.)

The 1972 Democratic National Convention was all about rules because the previous convention, the tumultuous street riot in Chicago, vividly ignored the popular will. The convention chose Humphrey, even though in the 1968 primaries he and his surrogates amassed less than 30 percent. The combined vote of Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy, 69.3 percent, was ignored by delegates. It was the last time a Democrat could steal a nomination.

Rules, their revisions and their unintended consequences, have dominated the Democratic party ever since. Democrats have sought to be inclusive, awarding delegates proportionally, shunning the winner-take-all model of the Republican party. Had Democrats followed the GOP example, Clinton would have secured the nomination months ago after winning California and other large states.

Rules are rules, as even Harold Ickes, Clinton's rulemeister, would occasionally agree. Ickes has for 40 years been the wizard, scholar and poet laureate of Democratic party rules, usually on the insurgent side: for McCarthy in 1968 and Edward Kennedy in 1980. In August of 2007, he was one of 29 members of the Democratic National Committee's panel on rules and bylaws agreeing to ban delegates from Michigan and Florida, whose early primaries violated party rules. The vote was 29-1. The sole dissenter was a supporter of Barack Obama.

On Jan. 25, after Clinton lost in Iowa, her campaign announced that her name would go on the Michigan ballot. Without much explanation, that action suggests that rules are elastic and that rules are for others.

Democrats meet again on May 31 to re-consider rules and the Clinton team's latest rationale. The Clinton campaign's moving goalposts now qualify for frequent flier miles. They evoke what the charmingly acerbic director Billy Wilder said about Hollywood: "No matter how cynical I become, it's hard to keep up."

Comments

[TIMLHOWE]

I HAVE WORKED IN NATIONAL CAMPAIGNS AND IN AND FOR THE NATIONAL MEDIA...

This is far from over though.

This is where this all has been leading since the Clinton team of Sosnick, Craig Smith, Maggie Williams and Ickes took over from the catatonic pair of Patty Doyle and Penn.

Since then we have won every state we needed to win - leading by 500,000 votes since feb.

When Obamas lawyer stopped the mi revote - over the amazing reasoning that it was unfair that those who had already voted in the gop primary couldnt vote AGAIN in the revoted dem primary - I saw this could be their campaign's fatal mistake...

But only 'IF' Hillary was able to win TX,OH,IN,KY, WV...

Well...it seems she has....and since Obama stopped the MI revote - we now will fight to count that state as voted. There can be no "compromise". The Obama campaign already showed this, the revote was the frigging compromise!

Because of Bauer's dirty dealing -Hillary gets ALL her MI delegates and then we fight over the uncommitted!

This was and is the plan folks! The media dont get it - but this is why she has fought on - not to maybe be vp as the fools keep suggesting - but to get the majority of votes in the primaries and winning over the SDs.

The media may be with O'barry - but the wind and the tidal change is with US!

[johnwinner]

Please wake up; if you win the nomination, you lose the lection; if you destroy the party you lose the election, you lose all the policies you claim to be fighting for. The math won't work, it will never work; spin doesn't change reality. You are committing self-destruction and yet gloating over it. Pathetic.

[SkipHarv]

Sen. Obama and his lawyers was only saying that in Mi. to be able to VOTE for local issues and your candidate HAD TO BE ON THE BALLOT. So what about the people who voted Rep. or uncommitted who would've voted for Sen. Obama or the people not VOTING at all either by absence or omission off the ballot. These people would be disenfranchised and how only the wording of the recount; not the recount itself, could be grounds for a lawsuit. Now if you feel that by declining to agree with something that will probably be litigated on, is 'blocking' the vote you are sadly mistaken.

[kdublya]

Once again, we get the math.

Splitting the Michigan into two primaries where Clinton's share is off the table amounts to double counting. Under this ponzi scheme, Sen. Clinton's 60% is guaranteed, with a potential 20% boost coming from the uncommitted votes (split 50/50).

First, there is nothing criminal in removing his name from the ballot. Everyone except Sen. Clinton (?and Kucinich?) did as much. Therefore, there is no crime fitting this punishment

Second, it is a documented fact that the uncommitted voters DID NOT VOTE for Sen. Clinton. She deserves no special reward for keeping her name on the ballot.

Third, If you were to annualize the ROI on what you are supporting, you would be accused of loan sharking and/or usury - Credit cards don't charge that high rate!

[Gma11]

This is hilarious.

The day I STOPPED supporting Hillary was the day I heard she was putting Ickes in charge. Are you familiar with his history? I knew exactly what turn Hillary's campaign was going to take at that moment - which has happened - and I could not ethically be a party to it. Hillary lost all creditibility to me at that moment.

[johnwinner]

Hillary intends to destroy the party - she's gone off the deep end, and intends to drag us all down with her. Reasoning with Clinton's fanatical followers is becoming impossible - their assaults on blog commentary threads are becoming nauseatingly violent, racist, and irrational. This is no longer about an election over issues, the Clinton camp doesn't care about issues; this has becom some wierd religious campaign for I know not what. They would rather lose everything than compromise: after the smoke clears, they will blame everybody but themselves, yet their own decisions led to it.

[timm0]

She's smart enough to know that the people desperately clinging to her candidacy (i.e. living vicariously thru her) are going to stay with her no matter what she does or says. It's pretty safe to say that these people are going to be loyal - just like the people loyal to bush find unending pools of excuses to rationalize every vile act he makes - despite mountains of deeds and words that prove her to be destructive, self-obsessed, and a lying, "typical politician­."

So she has her "cult" (ironic her trolls calling anyone not adoring hillary part of a "cult") now. This is a play on the DLC effort she and bubba launched many years ago. Build a splinter-group that you can personally control, and then wield their contributions and numbers to buy candidates and Congresspeople so you can get your way. hillary will, once the nomination is settled, officially declare the creation of a new group, to which her legion will flock. She will claim that it's giving a voice to blah, blah, blah. It's real charter is to serve hillary's whims. I'd love to speculate on what those will be, but she's such a phony there's no way to know what she will want and when she will want it. Oh, that didn't sound right....

Bottom line is that this creep is all about one thing - power. She has proved over and over again that she recognizes no rules or boundaries govern her pursuit thereof.

[Umungus]

Where are the authorities to enforce the party laws? Like an undiciplined child, they push boundaries and break rules until an adult steps up to put a stop to it.

Who are the adults in our party?

[Krikkit]

Unfortunately, one of the byproducts of having the Party of the Large Tent is that Democrats encompass wide-ranging groups with sometimes conflicting views. Trying to control the party is like trying to herd cats. That diminishes any power the party leadership may have.

For the record, the leadership is the DNC. In part under the charter "Bylaws" Section 4, it says "Each recognized state Democratic Party shall adopt and conduct its affairs in accordance with written rules." It aslo requires that when states pass laws that conflict with the rules, the state party is responsible for doing everything within its power to correct those laws to bring them into line with the party rules. The Charter does not state explicitly what will happen if those rules are violated, or what should happen if remedial steps fail, as in the case of the Florida vote.

The Rules and Bylaws committee which will meet in a few days can only study changes to the charter recommended to it and to pass recommended changes along to the convention floor. It does not have the power to change the rules. That is a role for the party at the convention. People who hope this meeting will end this endless fight will be sorely disappointed. I know I am already. But maybe they can make the rules more explicit for future contests.

The Democratic party charter can be found at http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/charter.pdf.

[Gma11]

You make a very important point. People overlook the fact that citizens have NO RIGHTS to vote in primaries or caususes, ONLY RIGHTS to vote in general elections. The primaries and causcuses are run by independent organizations, the political parties. And they create their own rules, as other formal organizations and bureaucracies do.

[kdublya]

Rahm Emanuel got it right... It's all about how the loser loses.

A few superdelegate defections would be enough to force the Clinton camp see reason.
Gov. David Paterson's recent comments are a warning to that effect.

However, I have mixed feelings about anyone answering the call.

[kdublya]

Well. well.

What'ya know?

http://thepage.time.com/2008/05/23/fridays-super-battle-2/

[Gma11]

Others are saying (unofficially) that they will switch once Obama reaches the 2026 and/or after the May 31st meeting and the end of the last primary.

[JonDev]

It should be clear to Clinton supporters by now that how she runs her campaign is how she would run the country. Imagine Wolfson as White House Communications Director, Penn as Chief of Staff, etc. Yikes and yuks

[Liam617]

Hillary is now in the business of building such expectations in her core supporters that he eventual loss (and it is only a matter of time) is viewed as a rejection of fairness by the DNC in favor of the golden child, Obama. Why else would she now start with the shenanigans of comparing the DNC rules to the Gore-Bush recount fight or the election in Zimbabwe??

It is an entirely false and cynical move on the part of Team Clinton and I encourage Hillary's supporters to see the latest gyrations of this campaign for what they are. She simply cannot win but is heightening the drama and playing with your emotions. She is now trying to deliberately break your heart later on so that you'll help her tear apart anyone else's chance.

[stonepier]

How eloquently Clinton would defend the popular votes of ME, IA, NE, and WA if they played into her math. Imagine if the tables were turned, if Obama were trying to claim a state in which her name had not been on the ballot - with what solemn outrage she would denounce him.

We can only hope that it will be over soon.

[tellinya]

This election belongs to MoveOn.org and their priciplred position to reject Hillary's vote of confidence for dubya on Iran. She and she alone lost this election. I used to be a stalwart supporter of Bill and Hillary. Her actions of late have carcatured them at home and abroad, of desperate conniving folk. In Europe they have lost all cred.

We must be active and vigilant to arrest the GOP fear drve.

[loax]

Clintons' strategy is not unlike a milatary coup. She and her cronies do not seem to care about the millions of people who did not vote because THEY, unlike SHE, followed the rules. How do they justify making every vote count, while leaving out potentially millions of voters who wanted to vote but did not because of the RULES? There is no excuse for her behavior. I would not be surprised if she never won a Senate Race or any other position again because of her continueing to try to slant the nomination her way, and hers alone. Harold Ickes, Terry McCauliffe, and Howard Woofson are all complicit in this obvious scam to disenfranchise the voters in Flroida and unwillingness to include the caucus states in their "Majic Math". What a shameful spectacle they are making of the process.

[CocteausTwin]

Mr. Nolan,
Finely written piece. It helps someone like myself, who was born in '66, to have a little more understanding of the Democratic presidential nomination process and its evolution.

I have included the following post that I wrote elsewhere on HuffPo and was based on my thoughts when I awoke this morning. If not appropriate please feel free to edit or remove this entire post. Thanks for your work.

Michael

[CocteausTwin]

Repost:
Well of course the Clinton camp believes or speaks the way they do, they are trying to use any desperate tactic to feign outrage for something that only plays into their idiotic metric of the day. Hillary was defeated fair and square. He is willing to compromise to have both FL and MI seated, even though they deserve no such thing due to their own state party leaders and state officials.

The state parties of FL and MI are part of the Clinton machine. Moving their dates up was all an attempt to disenfranchise all the other states post Super Tuesday, they would have been claiming "We won Fl and MI, how can anyone else be elected if they cannot win these two swing states?" They believed that they would be able to claim victory that night or the following day. They didn't give a crap about having every vote counted. But they assumed they would win Iowa. That is when everything went wrong (for them!) "How could we not win Iowa, we are the Clinton's!"

And now their only hope is to argue this insane popular vote metric and try to claim Obama is the one who is trying to disenfranchise votes. If it weren't for Obama, many of the 57 contests would have no say at all in who will be thee next POTUS. So it's destroy the party to have any hope for a Clinton in the White House.

[Kim445588]

We all are just not hip to the new Appalachian math.

[McFlipFlop]

Yes, the constant pandering to the ill-informed -- Hillary's strategy. Since Bill and Rendell have both said it, I fear she is gearing up to try and force her way into the VP slot.

I gather she thinks her delegates will overcome Obama's at the convention for the VP vote. It's doubtful. I look forward to seeing the political end of the Clintons, who appear to have indeed lost their morality.

Comedy video of Hillary Desmond.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWaL1XnUPN0

[smark]

Hillary's tactics should be the best reason why she should NEVER be offered the VP spot. She is doing nothing but trying to incite anger and division among her supporters and voters in general and single-handedly ruining the Democratic Party's chances in November. DOES THIS WOMAN EVEN KNOW HOW TO PLAY BY THE RULES? OR DOES SHE THINK THE CLINTONS ARE TOO HIGH AND MIGHTY FOR ANY RULES TO APPLY TO THEM??!!

[Krikkit]

Bottom line is that Hillary adds nothing to the electoral map. She hales from NY, which will vote blue in any case. Arkansas won't go blue even if she was the nominee. Her split of traditional Republican districts does not translate into a Democratic win of the state. She's not even on the long list, much less the short list.

[exmun]

The choice of VP is a decision left to the candidate, not the party. There's no way to "overcome" Obama and force Hillary on the ticket. He'll either put her on the ticket or not. I'm with Pelosi on this one... I don't think the two of them would be a good ticket.

[nonconformist2]

Zimbabwe? Are you kidding me?! Next she will be comparing herself to Nelson Mandela who spent, what?, 20 years in solitary confinement in his struggle for basic human rights. Hillary Clinton has gone and done it, she has become her own satire. Saturday Night Live can't write stuff this good.

[TribunusPlebis]

Hillary Clinton abandoned any respect for the truth when she compared the Democratic Party's refusal to accept the results of the Florida primary (conducted in violation of the party's rules) to the actions of the Zimbabwean dictator Roberto Mugabe's falsification of election returns a few weeks ago. For the past five years, brave democratic dissidents and protesting Zimbabweans who are both white and black have been arrested and beaten by Mugabe's security forces, women activists have been raped and killed, and entire neighborhoods known to be politically opposed to Mugabe have been bulldozed. Nothing approaching such repression has happened in the United States since the lynchings and killings of blacks in the South, at the height of segregationist fury in the early 20th century. For Senator Clinton to equate the Democratic Party's actions on the Florida primary dispute with the murderous brutality of an anti-democratic tyrant is more than an exaggeration, it's an insult to the party she wants to lead and the intelligence of her listeners.