Obama Should Think Big -- and Seat Michigan and Florida

Barack Obama should call for the Florida and Michigan delegations to be seated at the convention -- not as a concession to the Clinton camp or because of pressure but as an outside-the-box show of strength.

The Illinois senator has several things going for him right now: He has what everyone agrees is an insurmountable lead among pledged delegates; he has an imposing lead in total popular vote; and those facts give him this trump: superdelegates -- elected officials and party operators -- are not going coronate Mrs. Clinton in the face of all those advantages without a wildly compelling reason.

Put it another way: The superdelegates won't risk crippling the Democratic party by driving black voters out of it short of a colossal Obama collapse -- like wearing an al Qaeda flag pin while holding rallies with Jeremiah Wright. The Clinton camp has trotted out various arguments -- some quite silly -- for why the superdelegates should nominate her, but the nomination is his to lose.

But there's one argument that needs be addressed: Democrats don't want to go into the fall risking offending voters in a state they need for victory (Michigan) and one they desperately want (Florida).

So here's what Obama should do: Get bigger than the problem. Say that while the arguments against seating the delegations are all valid and helpful to him, as presumptive head of the party he needs to think of its best interests. And right now the Democrats' best interests lie in a united front in the fall. So he'll support the two states' delegations being seated.

Properly presented -- and if Barack Obama is good at anything, it's proper presentation -- it would demonstrate a position of strength.

Here's what would happen:

- The press and bloviators would go wild, entering new paroxysms of ecstasy over his ability to transcend old politics.
- The Clinton camp would be confused -- who knows, maybe they would even oppose seating the delegations out of sheer reactive instinct.
- The numbers would not change dramatically -- Obama would still have an insurmountable delegate lead and a formidable popular vote lead.
- The superdelegates, faced with more Obamamania, would have less room or reason to dislodge Obama.

Crazy? Probably. But it's time for a power play.

Comments

[Democrab]

Yes and if we could somehow harvest the green cheese the moon is made of, we could solve world hunger.

[mjc]

Great suggestion but don't count on Obama to do anything of the sort. He is committed to one idea: himself. He has delusions that he won't need the Democrats to get himself elected and certainly no particular states. As to a Democratic Congress, he probably couldn't work with one anyway. Apparently is kind of a pushy, hard head in the Senate.

[Ozarks]

A federal judge ruled the Michigan primary as "unconstitutional". Hillary is the only one on the apparently illegal Michigan ballot. Your statement :"But there's one argument that needs be addressed: Democrats don't want to go into the fall risking offending voters in a state they need for victory (Michigan)".
My response ---How can you offend Michigan voters for not allowing an illegal primary and desire somehow that a tainted election process to be involved in the nomination process. Michigan voters should not take it out on Hillary or Obama, they should vote out those idiots in Michigan for presenting them with a primary , not only in violation of DNC Rules, but unconstitutional and probably illegal in the first place. The argrument has been addressed with the Federal Judge's unconstitutional finding: An illegal primary can in no way influence a legitimate nomination.

[KELLI2L]

People in Michigan aren't stupid are they? Wasn't there a write-in area for another candidate? It's not like the people didn't know who else was running with all the debates on TV. . . . . . .

[liveandlearn]

the names on the ballot were clinton, dodd, gravel, kucinich, and uncommitted. the $#%^&*(
candidates refused to meet the deadline for write-in after they specifically met the deadline to remove their names from the ballot, so write-in would spoil your ballot.

why does new hampshire get away scot free after illegally moving up THEIR primary?

[ibsteve2u]

Gee, I wonder if someone will ask Hillary to "think big" and concede in order to throw her weight behind getting Obama elected to the Presidency and a whole slew of Democrats elected to the House and Senate?

[tea in the harbor]

She's not going to concede, that would require both a candid look at the real world, and an honest concern for Democrats and Americans. Her record shows clearly that she is interested in neither! Even with her approval ratings going down quicker than Monica, this is about HER! Everybody outside her campaign knows she is beaten, reality will just have to set in at it's own pace.

[Suprshrink]

Would you expect the same of Obama if the numbers were reversed?

[backfist64]

Mr. Schlesinger, I disagree. For several reasons.

First, Senator Obama isn't morally obligated to call for a seating of the Florida and Michigan delegates.
Doing so, he would be effectively sanctioning their brazen contempt for and violation of the DNC rules that those states pledged to obey.

Second, suggesting anything that even remotely looks like a waiver of the rules, establishes a precedent for other "rogue" states to violate the rules and then subsequently play the "disenfranchisment" card.

Further, I take exception to the suggestion that the DNC wouldn't dare risk alienating "black voters". I'd think that the DNC would be averse to alienating ANY voter--regardless of their color. Isn't it possible to respect a vote by a Black voter and White voter and an Asian voter as equally valuable and equally worthy? Isn't a vote for Senator Obama in South Carolina as valuable and meaningful as a vote for him in Idaho? Please ... do try not to marginalize.

[Suprshrink]

"brazen contempt?" Are you living in the same world as I. The voters had nothing to do with the change in their primary date. The republican party in both states was behind the change. And did you notice that the republicans only marginally punished MI by cutting their delegates by half. This is just too much.

[liveandlearn]

but you don't mind alienating the nearly 2.5 million who did vote democratic in suppressed turnout in michigan and florida, right?

[mostest]

"...show of strength."

Ha! Ha! Ha! A show of strength from a guy who votes present and sometime doesn't even show up (see kyle lieberman and absentee chairman).

Please! right bark; wrong tree.

[Ozarks]

Well you omitted the fact that Obama didn't show up for the Michigan Primary. Hillory did and in fact put her name on the ballot. "(P)resent" votes is a lot less offending than Hillory condoning and participating in an illegal primary!! Illegal? you may ask? I suggest you read the latest Federal Judge Finding on the Michigan Primay- He found it was "Unconstitutional" . Yes Hillary did put her name, and only her name appears, on this illegal ballot in Michigan. Further, Hillary has now sunk deeper into this unconstitutional , unethical, illegal morass in Michigan by bemoaning that rejection of its results are disenfranchising Michigan voters. Obama may have voted present but he didn't show up in Michigan. In contrast, Hillary believes unethical, illegal, unconstitutional votes should be counted because she "showed up" in Michigan.

[Suprshrink]

None of the candidates campaigned in either state. Clinton and Kucinich were still on the ballot in MI and all were on the ballot in FL. Obama, however, bought a nationwide ad that was played in FL before the primary and he raised funds in FL as well. So, he was not an unknown.

You want to make this something it is not.

[liveandlearn]

show me the reference so i can read it.

[Lastamendment]

The 'vote present' issue is a straw man argument. Obama has explained repeatedly that voting present in Illinois is a strategic tactic to signal that you might support a bill if there are changes made. It is not at all like being an absentee.

[Sloane7]

I think this would be fine if the SDs would support him so that the games she played on this don't serve her the way she planned. Let's face it, this is classic Clinton, leaving her name on the ballot, acknowledging the "beauty contest" nature of the vote then changing when it serves her, trashing the caucuses because her campaign never got the hang of them, suing over caucus sites, blowing $150M with no logical endgame, having the benefits of name recognition, a former president as surrogate and massive dishonesty in her campaign but STILL being behind in the votes, pledged delegates, popular vote.

The Clinton victim message has gotten to be so ridiculous one can hardly look at the Clintons anymore. So, if the SDs are seeing all of this for what it is while Obama is giving Clinton credit for votes she never should benefit from, then it seems okay. No on is after FL and MI. Everyone supports the FL and MI voters. It's the games that have gotten ugly. I'm so over the Clintons now.

[AreYouFibbing]

Obama is too cautious. He hasn't wanted to have FL and MI seated because he thinks it will hurt him, which it probably would. One thing I have learned about Obama, and despite all the dissing of Hillary, is that he is not about even playing fields or doing the right thing.

[liveandlearn]

read this: http://www.houston-press.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/full

[gjoh]

And the next time that the DNC makes rules about the primaries, no one will listen. Who cares if you break the rules. We'll just force the DNC to change them later.
As a person who tries to obey the rules, there's nothing I hate more than when the rule breakers get their way. I get punished for following the rules and they get rewarded for breaking them. Is that what you want?

[Suprshrink]

This argument sounds a little to rigid. The DNC selectively applied the rules. The DNC had a responsiblity to investigate how the dates were changed and if the democrats had tried to stop the change. And taking this a step further, who is the DNC to tell democrats how and when to vote? If they are willing to let these votes go, perhaps they won't mind when I don't vote democrat anymore.

[liveandlearn]

in this case, we, the voters of michigan and florida, get punished selectively for really bad rules making. the other rule breaker, new hampshire, got away with breaking them so that you didn't even know they did it.

[Anastasia]

Since neither candidate campaigned in Michigan and Hillary left her name on the ballot, even though Biden, Edwards, Richardson and had Obama removed theirs, it seems unfair to reward her with those delegates.

There's also the issue of, essentially rewarding Michigan and Florida, for jumping the gun. It could make it next to impossible for the DNC to enforce the rules in the future, if there is no down side to keeping them.

[kenmattos]

This problem with Michigan and Florida's delegations has been bothering me for some time. If the Democrats are going to win this November, I believe seating these delegations is crucial. Yes, there are established procedures and in following them delegations from both states may be seated. Otherwise, those two states may very well end up in the GOP column and others may be swung away from the Democratic nominee because of how this plays out in the campaign.

[davg]

I disagree. The reason FL/MI decided to move themselves up on the calendar is that they thought their vote didn't count in the past (because it was after super Tuesday). So they've been living with the idea that the nominee (both parties BTW) was being picked without them and still coming out in November. Also, if voters wanted to punish someone, why punish the nominee who had nothing at all to do with stripping them of their delegates or deciding whether or not there should be a redo?

But think about what might happen if FL/MI are redone. If Obama wins, there'll be no big difference. But if Hillary wins BECAUSE of the redos, then Obama supporters would have an understandable reason to stay home... "Hillary won by cheating". And that wouldn't be just in FL/MI but everywhere! Also, Obama supporting independents might move to McCain for the same/similar reasons.

Finally, imagine the 527s that would justify sentiments of Hillary being a "win at any cost" politician, rules notwithstanding.

[Bozwellian]

That outrageous "argument" that due to the voters in the primary being disenfranchised by NOT having their PRIMARY votes count just because the SET/ AGREED RULES were NOT followed and was KNOWN the CONSEQUENCE of their respective delegates then NOT to be seated at the convention­...UH, HILLARY SIGNED ON TO THOSE RULES, even acknowledged PUBLICLY that "those votes did NOT count ", but of course that was back when she was still thought/figured INEVITIBLE in becoming the nominee...­Now that she is behind and in need of scrounging any and all ways and means, any and all means TO scrounge is to be deemed acceptable no matter the consequences in THIS primary OR FUTURE ONES that have rules as well.
YOU WANT DIFFERENT RULES ? Fine, get different rules in place for NEXT time but NOT after the fact and stop inciting and enflaming the issue , it does further harm to the candidate that AGREED TO THE RULES BUT DOES NOT WANT TO ABID BY THE RULES, wanting special dispensation from the RULES and has the GALL to blame her opponent who HAS REPEATEDLY DECLARED HE WILL FOLLOW THE RULES AND DECISIONS OF THE DEM PARTY !! IT IS HILLARY WHO IS NOT WILLING TO DO SO !!! HURUMPH and that hurumph is from all the rest of the OTHER states that DID FOLLOW THE RULES !!!

[bklynsam]

Nonsense. This should not be about what Obama 'should do'. He's already done that..been doing that from day one.

This is about what Hillary should do. Here is a quote from her campaign in September 2007..

"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process.

And we believe the DNC’s rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role.

Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar."

Your focus in this story is on the wrong candidate. Obama doesn't need to 'look' presidential, he already is. It's called integrity. It's called standing by your word. We already have a president that thinks the rule of law applies to everyone but him. It might be nice, don't you think, to have a president that believes it applies to everyone.

I live in FL. My anger was directed at my state party leadership when this first came up. They defied the rules they themselves agreed to, and they had ample opportunity to go back to the agreed upon date. They chose not to. THEY are the ones who effectively disenfranchised the voters here. All the candidates pledged to follow the DNC rules. Changing them when politically convenient isn't something I consider a leadership quality.

[Gileo30]

Your anger is well directed.
The writer of this article "should" be the last person to tell
Obama what he should do.

[tea in the harbor]

I sure wish more of the people in Florida, and Michigan too, understood that the people disenfranchising them are the ones they elected! Like you said, they agreed to the rules and then agreed to break them, now they want the rest of us, who played by the rules, to feel sorry for them. I DO feel sorry for the VOTERS who are being abused, but the snakes here are in their back yard, and it is up to them to deal with them! PUT THE BUMS OUT! It appears to be too late to get their rights back for this election, but they can do this Nation a great service by sending the message that this kind of gaming the system will result in the GAMERS losing their jobs!

[crushinator]

Thank you bklynsam. I am a blue voter in a very red county in Florida. I know very well that my state "reps" didn't care one bit about my vote in a democratic primary.

[jakie]

HAS THE BILLERY'S EVER PLAYED BY THE RULES. THIS WOMAN IS UNBELEIVABLE SHE NEEDS TO GET OUT OF THE RACE AND LET THE GENERAL ELECTION BEGAN. SHE HAS NO MONEY AND SHE HAS LIED SO MUCH WHO WOULD BELEIVE HER AND FUTHER MORE CAN'T THINK OF BILL CLINTON BACK IN THE WHITE HOUSE THE CLINTON 'S THINK THEY HAVE TO WIN. SO HILLARY GO HOME

[handyallen1]

turn off your caps if you want to be read sheeeesh

[hispaneconomist]

Darn Right! About Florida and Michigan be counted.
Obama should set The Morality of the Democratic Party!
I have enjoyed your article, Louie.

[mingusman]

On one hand this all makes a certain amount of sense, but on the other, it might be SOOOO unexpected that the stupid American electorate might think he's from another planet (forget about being a Muslim) and REALLY be afraid of him.