Foodie Rant - Properly Sauced? Try Properly Ripped Off.
Oprah-geddon: Winfrey To Quit Show In 2011
Daley Blames - Who Else? - The Media For Oprah-geddon
NYT Preps For Chicago Edition
Chicago Gets Googled
With this year's presidential primaries perhaps the most exciting in recent memory, the media, and the nation, have paid very little attention to today's Democratic primary in Florida. Unlike the Republicans, who will let half of the state's delegates vote at the convention, the Democrats stripped Florida of its delegates to the August convention for holding a primary earlier than party rules allowed. As part of the party's castigation of the state, Democrats have agreed not to campaign in Florida, an agreement that has been honored until now.
After her devastating loss in South Carolina, Hillary Clinton began campaigning in earnest in Florida this week. Clinton, together with state party leadership, is calling on the national party to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates at the convention. "I know other campaigns have tried to downplay the significance of these two states," Clinton said Friday in South Carolina. "I think that is not a good strategy for Democrats or any of us who cares about the outcome of this election." She's also apparently violated the agreement not to campaign in Florida, stopping to meet voters in Sarasota and answer reporter's questions. “I just wanted to say hello to a few people who were nice enough to wait for me,” she told the press there.
So why all the ruckus over Florida? Why does today's vote matter so much? A lot of it has to do with the arcane and deeply political rules that govern the Democratic Party's nominating convention this summer in Denver.
Unlike the Electoral College, the Democratic Primaries are not winner-takes-all. Instead, they work on a proportional representation model. That is, each candidate wins state delegates roughly equal to the proportion of the vote that they get there. So while Barack Obama holds the lead in delegates earned in primary voting - 63 to 48 - Hillary Clinton holds the lead in total delegates - 250 to 152. That number includes delegates won in state primaries, as well as superdelegates. Superdelegates first came into being in the 1970s, after control of the Democratic Party nominating process essentially moved into the hands of party officials, away from the primary and caucus process. This was intended to afford some control over the nominating process to the people that had played significant roles in previous campaigns. Regular delegates are committed to vote for the candidate that sent them to the convention; superdelegates have no commitments. They can support whichever candidate they feel will best represent the party in the general election. Adding to the intrigue is the fact that someone who has no hope of winning the nomination (John Edwards) can move his delegates over to the candidate that he supports. Edwards has made it clear that he won't be backing Hillary, and with 26 delegates before Super Duper Tuesday (and more to come), he could hold the keys to the nomination.
This year, there are 796 superdelegates, and while the final number isn't set until March 1, all Democratic members of the US Congress, members of the Democratic National Committee, state governors, and other sundry elected officials will be part of that group. This is why Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Obama is significant.Think of the national convention in terms of Chicago clout: when a party player like Ted Kennedy throws his support behind a candidate like Obama, he takes a lot of other, less powerful Democrats with him. That means more people on the ground working for his campaign, and more clout at the convention, and therefore a better chance of winning the nomination in a close primary election season.
While the national party has tried to marginalize both Michigan and Florida for holding early primaries against party rules, the fact of the matter is that it is highly unlikely that Democrats will hold a convention without delegates from two decisive states, each of which played a role in the last two presidential elections. In each presidential primary since 1984 no candidate has remained viable going into Super Tuesday. This year there are two, with a potential kingmaker in John Edwards. Whether Clinton gets any momentum out of today's vote remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that this primary season will be one of the most closely contested in at least a generation.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
John Edwards is going to throw his delegates to whoever gives him Attorney General. If we are continuing the Kennedy comparisons from yesterday, he will be Obama's RFK.
Last night on MSNBC's SOTU coverage some expert said there's no way Michigan and Florida get included.
why not Obama's VP
Great article. I had no idea how super delegates worked until now and I now see why the Kennedy endorsement has real meaning rather than just symbolism.
Attorney Gen can do more
John Edwards doesn't want to get into "Always a Bridesmaid..." situation. And Obama will CLEARLY need to choose someone who has more experience than he does, especially in foreign policy. Joe Biden for Secretary of State.
Why not Wesley Clark?
Miltary personnel in that office is a TERRIBLE idea (See Colin Powell) because they are trained their entire careers to fall in-line with their Commander in Cheif. So what happens when the CinC is a retard? You get Colin the Patsy up at the UN spewing a bunch of garbage and cut to eight years later of surges and shit and it is all bad news.
That office requires an independent mind like Biden. I love him.
Joe Biden is about as exciting as unsalted rice cakes.
Kevin, absolutely not! He is always saying racist and made up things. Also, he plagarizes. He his VERY entertaining because in 30 years of public service, he has developed no tact, which is very strange.
@Spav1:
Wesley Clark is more than just "a military personnel". He's been in the business and political world for a while now, and I'm more than certain he'd be happy to help guide someone like an Obama through the Iraq quagmire.
I just think an old white Southern guy with some expertise in military matters would be just the thing for Barack.
Maybe Wesley Clark for VP then. THAT would be an interesting ticket.
Clark endorsed Hillary back in
September
Those endorsements are all up in the air if Hillary isn't the nominee. For party unity, she would support Obama and the Clark could be on the ticket if he so chose.
To be fair to Colin Powell he was sort of the first high profile Bushie to quit to 'spend more time with his family' AKA "get out of this stupid administration where I just have to present bull sh*t false evidence to the UN".
I still say Bill Richardson would be Obama's best choice for VP.
You guys are looking in the wrong place for a VP anyway. Wesley Clark's foreign policy is as a General AFAIK. How about an actual politician that supports Obama and can carry some southern states like Florida and Georgia.
Worst Case Scenario: Edwards throws his support and delegates to Hillary and then joins her ticket-> disenfranchising many Obama supporters and possibly sinking the 2008 'Democratic sure win'.
SlapHappy:
You can't bring more ethnic to an Obama ticket. He is going to go with a white man for sure (same for Hillary), which means Richardson is out.
Kfunk: How about you name an "actual politician" who would fit the bill? Clark ran in 2004 and won the Oklahoma primary...so does this count?
People in the south LOVE them some military. I think Clark would be a great choice.
The whole, bring geography to balance the ticket doesn't really fly anymore. See: every election for the past twenty years. When politicians are no longer assured that they can win their own states (Gore/Edwards), why should it then follow that they can win wide swaths of the country. Your conventional wisdom is totally out of date.
Spav1 argues like a caveman clubbing someone over their head and dragging them to a cave to sodomize them.
This is effect is helped further along by the creepy picture of an obviously brainwashed Katie Holmes staring back through your soul.
Now that I've made my piece with spook, I need a new nickname...
No one here understands logic if it isn't the conventional wisdom. God forbid we think things that aren't mainstream.
And that picture is is pre-brainwash, from Dawson's Creek.
Oh thanks- I forgot that electoral votes were broken up according to unconventional thinking.
I can't really understand your totally awesome logic because I am so mainstream in my views.
If you like Clark then you should probably go with the whole out-dated geography thing since that would be one of his strengths. Snagging Oklahoma will be pivotal to success in 2008- too bad Wesley finished a strong 4th place overall last time behind Kerry, Dean, and Edwards.
Also a guy should show he can win an election (any one besides OK) before you pair him with someone else who has experience issues.
Oh, spav, you know I love you.
But the potential for Lord Xenu to grab a hold of her frontal lobe is right there in those eyes.
Clark has military and foreign policy experience, what Obama needs on a ticket. With public distrust of government in general pretty high and of Congress in particular, I would argue that it would be better to have a "Colin Powell" type on the ticket.
I am just suggesting. At least I had the stones the throw a name out. Thanks for hiding behind stupid and out-dated rhetoric. Back it up.
Does Foreign Policy experience mean blowing crap up in Mediterranean countries? Generals don't make foreign policy or negotiate it- they follow the executive branches direction. Besides, Clark is squarely in the Clinton camp after serving under Bill and endorsing Hillary.
I think Edwards will be spending the next few days trying to cozy up to Obama as VP while flaunting the offer of his delegates. They possibly have already agreed to join up but are waiting for some time to pass to appear less shady.
Outdated Rhetoric 1: Obama needs him some Southern White man Love
Outdated Rhetoric 2: Change is good (Edwards says Change almost more often than Obama)
Outdated Rhetoric 3: Clark is about as exciting as a giant sack of potatoes (And I like Potatoes!)
Biggest outdated rhetorical downside:
We will get sick of hearing Edwards talk about that damn mill worker thing over and over again.
If Edwards throws his support to Obama before the 2/5 primary then I will guarantee he is Obamas running mate at the Dem Convention.
If he holds out, then your guess is as good as mine (unless your name is Spav1, then your guess is nowhere near as good as mine).
Kfunk: I will literally bet you money that Edwards doesn't make VP on ANY Democratic ticket.
OK- but money is probably not a good thing to bet. How about if you loose you have to change your chicagoist icon to a picture of my choosing until the election is over?
Agreed. Same terms on my end if you lose the bet?
OK deal- Just to clarify: Time frame is until the Presidential Election is over (not nomination process) and in order to even the odds a bit (since there is only one Edwards and 1,000,000 people who could be the running mate), if Edwards cashes his delegates into a cabinet position then we call it a draw but we honor the bet until its clear that has happened.
Complicated I know, but my outdated and rhetorical mind is pretty twisted.
I understand. I am "e-shaking" on it, which means it is on...no backing out!