Quick, somebody order up a fainting couch for those former tough guy liberal bloggers who are growing oh-so-woozy at the thought of a Democratic nomination process proceeding past February. Sure, they can hammer Bush, but their will grows weak and their legs go wobbly at the mere consideration of a real convention battle.
And they're so contradictory! Some argue that superdelegates are undemocratic and will "destroy the party." Barack Obama does not agree - he's busily trying to buy up a few votes with some of that campaign lucre he's got stashed away; that is to say, he's making perfectly legal contributions to the re-election campaigns of every superdelegate he can find. The meter's still in spin and he's dropped 700 large. Yeah, Obama doesn't believe those superdelegates - really, the Senate of the bicameral Democratic nomination process - will count. Uh-huh.
Still others need the smelling salts at the very suggestion that delegations will be seated - based on millions of legal votes, mind you - from Michigan and Florida. You know, a couple of states the Dems can easily afford to lose in November. It's changing the rules, they claim. The DNC - that noble and ethical body of all that is good and righteous - ruled the timing of their primaries to be a flagrant scheduling foul, so their delegates don't count. Until they do, of course. And they will. Hence, the flailing.
No coincidence, mind you, that these incredibly offended Democrats just happen to support Senator Obama over Hillary Clinton - and these instances of abominable, undemocratic behavior may give her candidacy a lift. Nor do these same paragons of electoral morality mention to obvious unfairness of the caucus system, with its short hours, raucus in-person bullying, and unscientific show of hands that get registered as "votes."
Why there's noble Ezra Klein, falling out in grief and despair over the very corpse of the republic itself:
If Hillary Clinton does not win delegates out of a majority of contested primaries and caucuses, her aides are willing to rip the party apart to secure the nomination, to cheat in a way that will rend the Democratic coalition and probably destroy Clinton's chances in the general election. Imagine the fury in the African-American community if Barack Obama leads in delegates but is denied the nomination because the Clinton campaign is able to change the rules to seat delegates from Michigan, where no other candidates were even on the ballot, and from Florida, where no one campaigned. Imagine the anger among the young voters Obama brought into the process, and was making into Democratic voters. Imagine the feeling of betrayal among his supporters more generally, and the disgust among independents watching the battle take place on the convention floor. Imagine how statesmanlike John McCain will look in comparison, how orderly and focused the Republican convention will appear.
This demonstrates not only a gross ruthlessness on the part of Clinton's campaign, but an astonishingly cavalier attitude towards the preservation of the progressive coalition. To be willing to blithely rip it to shreds in order to wrest a nomination that's not been fairly earned is not only low, but a demonstration of deeply pernicious priorities -- namely, it's an explicit statement that the campaign puts its own political success above the health of the party and the pursuit of progressive goals, and one can't but help assume that's exactly the attitude they would take towards governance, too.
What prompted this roar of outrage? The suggestion by Senator Clinton's campaign that if neither candidate is over the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination, they'd be perfectly happy to let the convention decide. Oh, the horror! Imagine running a close second to a candidate with a non-majority and actually exercising your right to an argument on the floor. Yes, Ezra - McCain will look statesmanlike in comparison, so will you consider voting for him in your utter horror? I think not. Me either. (Question: what candidate is Ezra for? Answer: Obama. Hard to guess.)
A few days back, that analyst extraordinaire, Chris Bowers, similarly exploded in vitriol over the thought of superdelegates actually casting the votes awarded them by the sage Dr. Dean. Threatened Chris:
If someone is nominated for POTUS from the Democratic Party despite another candidate receiving more poplar support from Democratic primary voters and caucus goers, I will resign as local precinct captain, resign my seat on the Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee, immediately cease all fundraising for all Democrats, refuse to endorse the Democratic "nominee" for any office, and otherwise disengage from the Democratic Party through all available means of doing so.
Howard Dean was reported to remark: "Don't let the door hit you in the ass, Mr. Bowers." Okay, I jest. Feelings are running high and I have the greatest respect for both Klein and Bowers, but they should really just settle in and let this whole thing play out. Likewise the estimable Donna Brazile, who also threatened to resign over the superdelegate situation. Let's watch this develop over the next few weeks. And why not? For political junkies, this is a gas. And we've got a juiced electorate ready to elect a Democrat either way.
It's February. Senator Obama is in the lead, but Senator Clinton still has a bit better than a two-minute drill to go to pull out victory herself. It's very much possible. There is absolutely no reason to panic now, or indeed in April if this contest is still close. I know the Obama campaign is trying to close things out now with this talk, but it's not their decision to make. If Obama trailed as slightly as Clinton does, he'd no doubt press on - quite possibly to the convention. So don't tar Hillary Clinton with any imagined foul motive that would surely hang exactly the same way on Barack Obama. They are two highly effective and fully ambitious politicians who will use every weapon in their arsenal to win - until their opponent gets the majority of delegates.
