12/02/2007

Guess who's ticked off about Michigan losing its DNC delegates?

I'll start by quoting Daily Kos user Neon Vincent, who says it better than I could:

The only winners, at least in the short term, are the Michigan GOP, who enabled the quixotic efforts of Debbie Dingell and others who wanted an earlier primary, when a February 5th caucus would have been perfectly acceptable to the DNC, the candidates, and most of the Michigan Democrats whose opinions I've heard and read. Instead, I'm disenfranchised so that some of the state party leaders can make a point about what they perceive as the unfairness of the primary calendar.

In the long run, it's time to reform the primary system and rationalize the calendar. In the short run, it's time to deny the Republicans the fruits of their victory by monkey-wrenching their primary.
Let me add that the January 15 primary will NOT give Michigan any more influence than Iowa or New Hampshire, because both of their primaries have been scheduled before January 15.

Plus, by not having delegates at the convention, Michigan will not be able to have any seats on the Platform Committee, costing Michigan Dems what influence we would have by having a caucus.

I don't buy this argument that 'they'll end up seating the delegates.' Is it likely the DNC will seat our delegates? Perhaps; I'm not an insider. But why would the DNC strip Michigan of its delegates only to return them?

What I do know is that supporters of the primary owe the very fact that the primary is even occurring to four far-right conservative ideologues on the state Supreme Court.

And I also know that dozens of people on Michigan Liberal alone - and surely hundreds of other Democratic activists around the state - are very angry about this. It is to these activists that the Michigan Democratic Party owes its recent success at the ballot box. This only serves to de-motivate many of them, causing them to lessen their activist role or, worse off, causing them to not vote Democratic.

So instead of more influence, which was the original intent of moving the primary on January 15, we get a primary which has cost Michigan its Convention delegates; will only include four candidates; will not feature campaigning from the candidates; is seriously dividing the state Party; and which owes its very existence to four extreme conservatives on the Supreme Court.

Yep, I'm quite ticked.

Disclaimer: For disclosure's sake, I should also note that (1) I support Barack Obama, one of the four who pulled out of the January 15 primary; and (2) I had been planning on seeking a spot as a Convention delegate.

1 comment:

Fraser said...

I agree entirely. We have been disenfranchised so that some people could assert they were proving a point. This was a time for politics at its best, not brinksmanship. We should be working to shorten the distance between the primary and the national election. The longer the time between the two elections, the more that the candidacy is reserved for the very rich.