So last time I discussed issues regarding the coming Presidential primary on the Republican side of the ticket and promised to look at the Democratic ballot. However, the race on the Democratic side just isn’t as interesting as the chaotic free-for-all on the Republican side (which seems a reversal in how the 2 parties normally operate). Frankly, the Michigan Democratic Presidential primary ballot looks like swiss cheese as it’s missing 2 or the top 3 contenders for the nomination who needed to vow to Iowans that their votes were more important than yours lest the oh-so-serious voters of Iowa hold it against them and stop their campaigns. For too long, the premier position of the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primaries have ensured that our Presidential campaigns are focused heavily on promises of ever-greater subsidies for corn farmers in Iowa and anti-tax pledges to the wealthy elite in the Granite State and not enough on rust belt concerns like the loss of manufacturing jobs.
As the overwhelming favorite, Senator Hillary Clinton didn’t have as much to lose as the campaigns of Barack Obama and John Edwards and so her campaign chose to remain on the ballot in Michigan while her top 2 competitors asked to have their names removed. In any case, the Michigan Democratic primary results are pretty much nothing more than a beauty contest with no real binding results. In remains to be seen how much the media decides the results are worth (my guess is that it depends on what they've already decided the story will be and whether Michigan's results play into that narrative). It’s a shame seeing as how Edwards’ heavy union support and Obama’s obvious appeal to the many black voters in the Detroit area and independent voters in the “middle” of the state could both be seen as paths to winning the state’s delegates and could have propelled either or both onto the national ticket and helped make Michigan a true player in the march to decide the national party’s nominees.
If you think I sound like I’m less than enthused about Clinton’s candidacy it’s not because I’m against her gaining the nomination, it’s more that I’m traditionally for the most populist candidate as well as usually rooting for the underdog (the two go hand in hand in modern American politics, for reasons I address below), and against the media coronation that seemed to be taking place earlier in the year. Clinton could only be a step up from the blundering and corrupt fool we have in the Oval Office right now- except that the media obsession and irrational hatred of the Clintons lingers. I would have concern that this could prove to be a distraction from governing as it was when President Clinton was launching attacks against al Qaeda in response to their growing threat but all the media wanted to talk about was the missile in the President’s pants. Conveniently, they imitated the right wing’s cries of “wag the dog” but then after September 11, 2001 wailed that Clinton hadn't done enough. I digress, but only to show how the media creates a narrative that isn’t necessarily true but becomes truth through repetition, a lie told often enough...
We’ve seen the media create an “inevitable” campaign (on the Democratic side with Hillary, on the Republican side first with McCain, then Giuliani, then Thomspon, then Romney and now back to McCain- anything to stop Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee who’s embrace of theocracy isn’t as disturbing to the media as his economic populism is) only to jump on some minor issue to beat up the leader with and create a horse race because more ratings and more money can be earned from a hotly-contested battle. It’s a long-standing theory of mine that the media will ALWAYS try to create a contest even where there is none because the closer the race, the more advertising money the campaigns will spend with the TV networks and thus they make more money. They also do their best to ensure the “marquee match ups” the same way boxing promoters maneuver their fighters into fights with the biggest purse (in boxing this is done by having your fighter beat up lots of losers to falsely inflate their record to seem more impressive- in politics it's often achieved by raising lots of money as early as possible in the race). It is this quest for the biggest, most expensive battle that has the media trying to coronate Hillary Clinton and only “select” Republican candidates with ties to the Wall Street financiers who helped George W. Bush swamp John McCain in 2000. McCain was best known for his stance in trying to get big money out of the political process- an issue he mostly ignores now.
Another disgusting aspect of this is that the media will often push out voices that don’t align with their profit-making motive. Witness the media silence regarding the fact that Iowa is, despite their best efforts, a tight 3-way race where the John Edwards stands a serious chance of winning or at least finishing in a tight cluster with the other 2 front runners. Edwards has run the most populist campaign in recent memory and speaks out strong and loudly against entrenched corporate interests which threaten to overwhelm our democracy if left unchecked (if it’s not already too late). Edwards was on the ticket in 2004 and has spent a fair amount of time campaigning in Iowa and yet the media treats him as an also ran- it is fair to argue that because of those factors he’s not treated seriously because despite these advantages he’s still in a dead heat but that would require ignoring the obvious appeal of the former First Lady and Senator from New York is running against perhaps the most charismatic Democratic politician since Senator Clinton’s husband left office. The media black out of Edwards is no doubt because the main message of his campaign is that big money (you know, the people who buy ads on network television) has too much power while the citizens don’t have enough. The last thing the traditional media wants to see is a citizenry in control of the political system- no more deregulation, stronger worker protections, FAIR trade, etc. In other words, they cover politics while looking out for their bottom line. Frankly, the mainstream corporate media has become an obstacle in the fight for the citizens of this country to take their democracy back and their coverage of politics proves it.
Despite all the crying and gnashing of teeth at Fox News that Democrats are “too scared” to debate on their network (in fact, it was not the party bosses but the Democratic activists who forced the move as they have cataloged far too many examples of Fox News’ obvious bias in their reporting, including time after time placing a Democrat “D” next to the name of a disgraced Republican, that the network is run by Republican political operatives, most of its pundits are paid by right wing think tanks and is known to have been the first network to wrongly call the 2000 election for candidate Bush) and that this is a sign they only cater to their own base, the network has announced that they will exclude Republican candidate Ron Paul from their New Hampshire debate. Paul recently set the record for one-day on-line campaign fund raising for a presidential candidate. However, Paul’s campaign is outside the parameters the media wants to see and thus they do everything they can to shut out his voice. I strongly disagree with many of Paul’s positions but I would strongly advocate for these positions to be openly debated instead of being shut out completely. Paul has polled consistently better than many of the media darling such as Fred Thompson in the state of New Hampshire and yet Paul is excluded and ignored.
We’ve seen this before when the debate system set up by the 2 major parties shut out 2rd party voices such as Ralph Nader who once again was a loud voice opposed to media deregulation and consolidation and of the influence of corporate America over our political system and the resulting erosion of our freedoms and our rights. The media pretends polls are what matters when polls often only are a reflection of what the media is reporting. It’s a vicious circle in which the media gets to create the winners and losers by what they report and what they exclude and often the winners are the ones that, unsurprisingly, have the positions most in line with the CEOs and shareholders of the giant media conglomerates. Everywhere I go, people are angry and upset at how broken the system is and yet the media does everything it can to ensure that the winners are the ones who most guarantee the least amount of change. I think we’re past the time in American politics where anything short of millions of people of streets can effect much change, and we saw before the idiotic invasion of Iraq that our corporate media will even do its best to ignore and dismiss that.
So, in other words, it doesn’t matter who actually wins or loses in Iowa or even New Hampshire, let alone Michigan. What matters most is what a small group who attend each other’s cocktail parties in the upscale suburbs of Washington D.C., the “chattering class” if you will, decide. They will set up the expectations and they will decide how well the candidates performed against their false expectations and they will control the debates and manufacture a win for their side. No matter what, We The People lose.
For years, people in the other 48 states have decried the influence of two small, mostly white states in our political process which helps to further restrict the national debate by controlling which candidates are even seen as viable in a national election. The time has come to break the system and I applaud those in Michigan who stood up and did their best despite the fact that it backfired and now Michigan and Florida voters have lost the ability to fully participate in the system. Since we never really got a say in the process until it was mostly decided we really haven’t lost much, if anything.
I’d like to think in the next four years we’ll have figured out a better process- though we seem headed for a series of randomly selected, alternating regional primaries which may or may not be an improvement. However, given the fact that the entrenched interests are making serious money off the system as it exists now, the only way things change is if they change in a way that makes the Presidential election an even bigger revenue stream for the big media powers.
There is a slight outside chance that the people can have an influence larger than the media and select candidates willing to step up, listen to the people, lead, and change the corrupt system in place. WE can be the fly in the ointment. It is that small hope that keeps me pressing on. In 2004, the compressed primary season paved the way for a surprise showing for both John Kerry and John Edwards in Iowa (fueled by a desperate Gephardt campaign attacking Howard Dean which helped create the opening- something which could well happen in the GOP field this time, most likely for John McCain as Romney and Huckabee slug it out) that propelled them onto the national ticket. With an even more compressed selection process in place this time, I fear the possibilities are even greater than an early win will prove to be decisive and that only one or two states will get any real say (fueled by the media insistence that any other candidates step down only serves to speed us toward the general election which equals money for the big media companies). There’s a slim chance that an “outsider” candidate could win big early and use the condensed schedule to propel themselves to a surprising victory, but I wouldn’t bet on that happening. In fact, that's my primary concern...
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Gee! Oh, Primary...
After a ridiculous year long pre-season that is mostly a fund-raising tour where lobbyists and media conglomerates are allowed to shape the race in advance, the Presidential primary election is finally close at hand. I really doubt most people besides political junkies have followed the race in any way other than hearing the jokes on late night talk shows or a few key moments where media coverage was so saturated over some meaningless non-event which was blown into a major gaffe (most of the above focused on the media's obsession with appearance and inability to deal with substance). So for the most part, the candidates remain a mystery to the majority of American voters and yet in just a month or two this thing could well be over.
Since Michigan has moved up the date of its primary the race may not be over when the show comes to town, but the field will likely have already significantly shifted by then. I have tried to take a look at how the contest might appear when Michigan voters get to have their say in just a couple of weeks. Since the Michigan Democratic primary will be mostly meaningless because the National Democratic Committee thinks Iowa and New Hampshire voters should have a special status conferred upon their ballots that voters in Michigan and elsewhere don't deserve, I have decided to look only for now at the Republican field and what the race will look like Michigan holds it's primary (though I hope to tackle the Democratic field in a future post):
First, the calendar:
January 3
Iowa- this seems to be coming down to a contest between Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. Romney has the advantage of having spent a billion dollars here and planning for this contest for years with many visits to the state. Huckabee has the advantage of a campaign surging at just the right time which is mostly based on his appeal to the most fundamentalist of white Christian voters in the GOP primary which had yet to find a candidate they liked. The most fun thing to watch is how the establishment Republicans in the chattering class are attacking Huckabee in the media, hoping to cut off his campaign at the knees before it gains traction. The Wall Street Republicans have seen none of their preferred candidates taking hold and there's no doubt their ideal candidate would be Romney and Giuliani so that a Romney defeat of Huckabee in Iowa is crucial. But the evangelical voters who make up a large chunk of the base activists in the GOP have found no other candidate to their liking until finding Huckabee acceptable thanks in no small part to his past as a Baptist preacher and his support for putting people who are HIV+ in concentration camps. Expect Huckabee and Romney to finish 1 and 2 with the big surprise who ends up in 3rd- that person then gets to declare themselves the real winner and play the media expectation game. If Huckabee doesn't win Iowa expect the media to declare his candidacy dead or at least mortally wounded. After Iowa it's quite possible Fred Thomspon finally makes official what everyone knew the day after he announced- he never really wanted to be in this thing other than to appease his ego.
January 5
Wyoming- will this really matter? If it does, for some reason I think it becomes mostly a campaign based on national name recognition, money and momentum from Iowa which would seem to help Romney unless he gets 3rd or worse in Iowa. Giuliani as a well known name with money could finish strong. But I'd also expect that the western voters in Wyoming would give a boost to either a strong libertarian like Ron Paul or a deeply fundamentalist candidate like Huckabee. Perhaps because Arizona is in the west and McCain still appeals to a certain independent voter (though it's a caucus which does help to discourage independents from voting) I could see him finishing in the top 3 as well. Still, I doubt the media pays much attention to Wyoming and I wonder whether the candidates are (though a dark horse candidate like Ron Paul usually has to try to win in the contests the top tier consider worthless so he could likely be building a strong grass roots effort and shock the establishment with a win which would come just in time for New Hampshire, a state a libertarian could actually win and rocket into contender status).
January 8
New Hampshire- In 2000 the maverick John McCain smashed George W. Bush in New Hampshire and dazzled the media with a no-nonsense yet charming style. That McCain has long since disappeared as he's spent most of the last 8 years sucking up the evangelical right wing voters who killed his campaign last time which might have alienated him from the more socially moderate fiscal conservatives in N.H. Romney has a regional advantage he hopes will propel him to a victory (or at least 2nd place). Have no doubt that the anti-tax independents in New Hampshire will make a great showing for libertarian Ron Paul who will finish in the top 3 if not score a major upset of 2nd or even 1st. If Huckabee didn't win Iowa and doesn't come in 1st or 2nd in N.H. expect his candidacy to be declared over my the media pundits. After New Hampshire expect the race to boil down to Romney, McCain, Paul and Rudy Giuliani who will be bunkered down in Florida waiting to take on the ones still standing (see below). Romney and McCain have the most to lose in New Hampshire and if either one finishes third here they're toast.
January 15
Michigan- One would expect Mitt Romney, son of former Governor George Romney, to do well in Michigan. However, Mitt's dad was a Republican back before the party became dominated by theocrats who would impose a belief test on the office of President, or dog catcher for that matter. Expect John McCain to once again do well in Michigan though it may not be as big as when he broke down John Engler's infamous fire well erected to protect George W. Bush in 2000. I still think Romney has the home town boy advantage and McCain will still do well but the big winner in Michigan will be Ron Paul. Paul's libertarianism seems to be gaining him a lot of support and his campaign has been the only one I've even seen physical evidence of.
January 19
Nevada- Given the extreme anti-immigration rhetoric that the average Republican primary voter demands to hear from the candidates and that only John McCain has really done well to not walk too far out on that ledge, expect McCain who's from neighboring Arizona to do well. Other than that, I haven't a clue other than I'd expect the nationally-well known candidates like Romney and Giuliani's name and money advantages to play well here. Either way the news will probably be obscured by whoever wins South Carolina which also votes on the 19th.
South Carolina- South Carolina has recently been the "fire wall" in the Republican primary. Because of it's size and position in the race, as well as how it reflects the white, right wing and Christianist nature of the Republican base, the state is yet again poised to be a "decider" this time just as it did in 2000 when it dashed McCain's hopes of winning the nomination. I would expect a Baptist preacher like Huckabee to do great here is he is still hanging around and could even make him a front runner if he makes the top 3 in New Hampshire and continues the momentum. However, with a host of other races in big states coming soon after S.C., the state may not have the final say especially with Giuliani waiting in the wings to see who emerges from a brutal early primary season.
January 29
Florida- apparently Giuliani has decided to sit out the early contests and hopes that a big win in Florida will jump start his campaign after the early contests have knocked out most of the also-rans. Most people expect the race to be all but over by this point but I see a good chance that this thing is still confused and Florida could confuse it even more. Since Florida's Democratic primary is an meaningless as Michigan's, you have to wonder if the vote could see an influx of independents and Democrats who help push one campaign over the top. Perhaps the elderly Florida rejuvenate the campaign of the elder statesman John McCain.
In short, this thing is going to be wild and may drag out longer than the Republican establishment would prefer (though it should be over February 5 when a mass of states vote on the same day, including California and enough other states that someone could near the number of delegates needed for victory and begin the calls for the other candidates to drop out). Right now the knives are out against Huckabee who's surging in Iowa but is seen as too evangelical and too liberal on economic issues for the true power brokers in the GOP (listen to what the ivy league pundits on the right like George Will, Charles Krauthammer and others are saying- they truly fear a Huckabee nomination), the financial elite would prefer Romney or Giuliani or even McCain. Expect Huckabee to get "Deaned" in Iowa as every little gaffe and anything short of 1st place will be declared by the media as the end of his campaign- if I were Huckabee I'd avoid an enthusiastic speech in the event of not winning a resounding victory in Iowa. The real test is how much power the theocratic wing of the party has versus the moneyed elite and whether the contest between the two wings turns into something that breaks the party in half and possibly even helps contribute to a third party run (which Ron Paul seems most capable of, unless the candidacy of a Romney or Giuliani fuels a run from a Christian fundamentalist candidate or a win by Huckabee causes Wall Street Republicvans to beg New York Mayor Bloomberg into the contest). Since Reagan, the Republicans have mostly held together a majority coalition but the fault lines have been emerging. In the end, the GOP can hold together if they are united in a trying to avoid a humiliating defeat at the hands of their most hated political enemy- Hillary Clinton.
An important thing to consider is how much the shifting Democratic field shapes the Republican race. The more Hillary Clinton's campaign loses the media-created aura of inevitability the more Republican voters are likely to sense that they don't need to hold their nose and cast their lot with someone "who can beat Hillary" yet isn't tough enough on immigration, taxes, abortion, guns, gays, etc. (Giuliani, I'm looking at you- you too, Romney). However, if Clinton ends up doing well in Iowa it could unite the GOP in their long-running irrational fear of anything associated with the Clinton name.
Another interesting of the aspect of the race to watch is that as much as John McCain seems to be irrelevant now, the fact remains that he has been relatively unscathed by the back and forth attacks of the current front runners (especially between Romney and Huckabee in Iowa which is starting to resemble how Dick Gephart's attacks on Howard Dean took out Dean and let Edwards and Kerry emerge as the front runners after surprising finishes in Iowa in 2004) and could emerge with enough delegates to win the nomination should no one else ever emerge as a true front runner. As much as the GOP has flirted with everyone in the field at various points, McCain could emerge as the standard bearer should no one else grab with enough momentum or delegates to win it outright.
By biggest fear, is that the advanced calendar of this primary election will mean that the race has been decided by the time most people even realize it's time to make a decision. So, hopefully this is a wake up call that this election process is like the tiny pebble at the top of the hill, soon about to become an unstoppable avalanche. The campaign process is broken and needs to be fixed but we can only make our voices heard when he actually show up and vote. Do your homework, research the issues and candidates' records, look past the rhetoric and the rumor and make an informed decision.
Since Michigan has moved up the date of its primary the race may not be over when the show comes to town, but the field will likely have already significantly shifted by then. I have tried to take a look at how the contest might appear when Michigan voters get to have their say in just a couple of weeks. Since the Michigan Democratic primary will be mostly meaningless because the National Democratic Committee thinks Iowa and New Hampshire voters should have a special status conferred upon their ballots that voters in Michigan and elsewhere don't deserve, I have decided to look only for now at the Republican field and what the race will look like Michigan holds it's primary (though I hope to tackle the Democratic field in a future post):
First, the calendar:
JANUARY 2008
* January 3: Iowa (caucuses)
* January 5: Wyoming (GOP caucuses)
* January 8: New Hampshire (primary)
* January 15: Michigan
* January 19: Nevada (precinct caucuses), South Carolina (R primary)
* January 26: South Carolina (D primary)
* January 29: Florida
FEBRUARY 2008
* February 1: Maine (R)
* February 5: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado (caucuses), Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho (D), Illinois, Kansas (D), Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico (D), New York, North Dakota (caucuses), Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah
* February 9: Louisiana, Kansas (R)
* February 10: Maine (D caucuses)
* February 12: District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia
* February 19: Hawaii (D), Washington, Wisconsin
MARCH 2008
* March 4: Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont
* March 8: Wyoming (D)
* March 11: Mississippi
APRIL 2008
* April 22: Pennsylvania
MAY 2008
* May 6: Indiana, North Carolina
* May 13: Nebraska (primary), West Virginia
* May 20: Kentucky, Oregon
* May 27: Idaho (R)
JUNE 2008
* June 3: Montana, New Mexico (R), South Dakota
AUGUST 2008
* August 25-28: Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado
SEPTEMBER 2008
* September 1-4: Republican National Convention in Minneapolis-St.
January 3
Iowa- this seems to be coming down to a contest between Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. Romney has the advantage of having spent a billion dollars here and planning for this contest for years with many visits to the state. Huckabee has the advantage of a campaign surging at just the right time which is mostly based on his appeal to the most fundamentalist of white Christian voters in the GOP primary which had yet to find a candidate they liked. The most fun thing to watch is how the establishment Republicans in the chattering class are attacking Huckabee in the media, hoping to cut off his campaign at the knees before it gains traction. The Wall Street Republicans have seen none of their preferred candidates taking hold and there's no doubt their ideal candidate would be Romney and Giuliani so that a Romney defeat of Huckabee in Iowa is crucial. But the evangelical voters who make up a large chunk of the base activists in the GOP have found no other candidate to their liking until finding Huckabee acceptable thanks in no small part to his past as a Baptist preacher and his support for putting people who are HIV+ in concentration camps. Expect Huckabee and Romney to finish 1 and 2 with the big surprise who ends up in 3rd- that person then gets to declare themselves the real winner and play the media expectation game. If Huckabee doesn't win Iowa expect the media to declare his candidacy dead or at least mortally wounded. After Iowa it's quite possible Fred Thomspon finally makes official what everyone knew the day after he announced- he never really wanted to be in this thing other than to appease his ego.
January 5
Wyoming- will this really matter? If it does, for some reason I think it becomes mostly a campaign based on national name recognition, money and momentum from Iowa which would seem to help Romney unless he gets 3rd or worse in Iowa. Giuliani as a well known name with money could finish strong. But I'd also expect that the western voters in Wyoming would give a boost to either a strong libertarian like Ron Paul or a deeply fundamentalist candidate like Huckabee. Perhaps because Arizona is in the west and McCain still appeals to a certain independent voter (though it's a caucus which does help to discourage independents from voting) I could see him finishing in the top 3 as well. Still, I doubt the media pays much attention to Wyoming and I wonder whether the candidates are (though a dark horse candidate like Ron Paul usually has to try to win in the contests the top tier consider worthless so he could likely be building a strong grass roots effort and shock the establishment with a win which would come just in time for New Hampshire, a state a libertarian could actually win and rocket into contender status).
January 8
New Hampshire- In 2000 the maverick John McCain smashed George W. Bush in New Hampshire and dazzled the media with a no-nonsense yet charming style. That McCain has long since disappeared as he's spent most of the last 8 years sucking up the evangelical right wing voters who killed his campaign last time which might have alienated him from the more socially moderate fiscal conservatives in N.H. Romney has a regional advantage he hopes will propel him to a victory (or at least 2nd place). Have no doubt that the anti-tax independents in New Hampshire will make a great showing for libertarian Ron Paul who will finish in the top 3 if not score a major upset of 2nd or even 1st. If Huckabee didn't win Iowa and doesn't come in 1st or 2nd in N.H. expect his candidacy to be declared over my the media pundits. After New Hampshire expect the race to boil down to Romney, McCain, Paul and Rudy Giuliani who will be bunkered down in Florida waiting to take on the ones still standing (see below). Romney and McCain have the most to lose in New Hampshire and if either one finishes third here they're toast.
January 15
Michigan- One would expect Mitt Romney, son of former Governor George Romney, to do well in Michigan. However, Mitt's dad was a Republican back before the party became dominated by theocrats who would impose a belief test on the office of President, or dog catcher for that matter. Expect John McCain to once again do well in Michigan though it may not be as big as when he broke down John Engler's infamous fire well erected to protect George W. Bush in 2000. I still think Romney has the home town boy advantage and McCain will still do well but the big winner in Michigan will be Ron Paul. Paul's libertarianism seems to be gaining him a lot of support and his campaign has been the only one I've even seen physical evidence of.
January 19
Nevada- Given the extreme anti-immigration rhetoric that the average Republican primary voter demands to hear from the candidates and that only John McCain has really done well to not walk too far out on that ledge, expect McCain who's from neighboring Arizona to do well. Other than that, I haven't a clue other than I'd expect the nationally-well known candidates like Romney and Giuliani's name and money advantages to play well here. Either way the news will probably be obscured by whoever wins South Carolina which also votes on the 19th.
South Carolina- South Carolina has recently been the "fire wall" in the Republican primary. Because of it's size and position in the race, as well as how it reflects the white, right wing and Christianist nature of the Republican base, the state is yet again poised to be a "decider" this time just as it did in 2000 when it dashed McCain's hopes of winning the nomination. I would expect a Baptist preacher like Huckabee to do great here is he is still hanging around and could even make him a front runner if he makes the top 3 in New Hampshire and continues the momentum. However, with a host of other races in big states coming soon after S.C., the state may not have the final say especially with Giuliani waiting in the wings to see who emerges from a brutal early primary season.
January 29
Florida- apparently Giuliani has decided to sit out the early contests and hopes that a big win in Florida will jump start his campaign after the early contests have knocked out most of the also-rans. Most people expect the race to be all but over by this point but I see a good chance that this thing is still confused and Florida could confuse it even more. Since Florida's Democratic primary is an meaningless as Michigan's, you have to wonder if the vote could see an influx of independents and Democrats who help push one campaign over the top. Perhaps the elderly Florida rejuvenate the campaign of the elder statesman John McCain.
In short, this thing is going to be wild and may drag out longer than the Republican establishment would prefer (though it should be over February 5 when a mass of states vote on the same day, including California and enough other states that someone could near the number of delegates needed for victory and begin the calls for the other candidates to drop out). Right now the knives are out against Huckabee who's surging in Iowa but is seen as too evangelical and too liberal on economic issues for the true power brokers in the GOP (listen to what the ivy league pundits on the right like George Will, Charles Krauthammer and others are saying- they truly fear a Huckabee nomination), the financial elite would prefer Romney or Giuliani or even McCain. Expect Huckabee to get "Deaned" in Iowa as every little gaffe and anything short of 1st place will be declared by the media as the end of his campaign- if I were Huckabee I'd avoid an enthusiastic speech in the event of not winning a resounding victory in Iowa. The real test is how much power the theocratic wing of the party has versus the moneyed elite and whether the contest between the two wings turns into something that breaks the party in half and possibly even helps contribute to a third party run (which Ron Paul seems most capable of, unless the candidacy of a Romney or Giuliani fuels a run from a Christian fundamentalist candidate or a win by Huckabee causes Wall Street Republicvans to beg New York Mayor Bloomberg into the contest). Since Reagan, the Republicans have mostly held together a majority coalition but the fault lines have been emerging. In the end, the GOP can hold together if they are united in a trying to avoid a humiliating defeat at the hands of their most hated political enemy- Hillary Clinton.
An important thing to consider is how much the shifting Democratic field shapes the Republican race. The more Hillary Clinton's campaign loses the media-created aura of inevitability the more Republican voters are likely to sense that they don't need to hold their nose and cast their lot with someone "who can beat Hillary" yet isn't tough enough on immigration, taxes, abortion, guns, gays, etc. (Giuliani, I'm looking at you- you too, Romney). However, if Clinton ends up doing well in Iowa it could unite the GOP in their long-running irrational fear of anything associated with the Clinton name.
Another interesting of the aspect of the race to watch is that as much as John McCain seems to be irrelevant now, the fact remains that he has been relatively unscathed by the back and forth attacks of the current front runners (especially between Romney and Huckabee in Iowa which is starting to resemble how Dick Gephart's attacks on Howard Dean took out Dean and let Edwards and Kerry emerge as the front runners after surprising finishes in Iowa in 2004) and could emerge with enough delegates to win the nomination should no one else ever emerge as a true front runner. As much as the GOP has flirted with everyone in the field at various points, McCain could emerge as the standard bearer should no one else grab with enough momentum or delegates to win it outright.
By biggest fear, is that the advanced calendar of this primary election will mean that the race has been decided by the time most people even realize it's time to make a decision. So, hopefully this is a wake up call that this election process is like the tiny pebble at the top of the hill, soon about to become an unstoppable avalanche. The campaign process is broken and needs to be fixed but we can only make our voices heard when he actually show up and vote. Do your homework, research the issues and candidates' records, look past the rhetoric and the rumor and make an informed decision.
Sunday, December 02, 2007
State of confusion
Saturday was an interesting news day for Michigan. First, the state legislature, once again acting at the last minute, finally got a bill passed and signed into law both repealing the sales tax on some services 7 hours after it took effect and replacing the lost revenue with a bump in the new Michigan Business Tax. The AP has the story complete with ridiculous headline (once again pushing the false notion the service tax was widely disliked by the public):
Also, the Democratic National Committee decided to strip Michigan of its delegates due to an effort by Michigan and a select group of states trying to finally strip Iowa and New Hampshire of their undeserved and overpowering influence in the presidential nomination process.
The service tax will be replaced by a 21.99 percent surcharge on the taxes businesses will already pay under the new Michigan Business Tax, which takes effect Jan. 1. The surcharge would be eliminated in 2017 if certain economic conditions are met. Many small businesses don't pay the MBT and won't have to pay the surcharge.At least the bill got a good number of votes from both sides, passing 66-42 in the House and 33-4 in the Senate even if a solution should have come sooner than after the brand new tax had just come into effect, leaving too many businesses in a state of confusion as to whether they would be responsible for collecting the new service sales tax and once again hurting the state's image.
Also, the Democratic National Committee decided to strip Michigan of its delegates due to an effort by Michigan and a select group of states trying to finally strip Iowa and New Hampshire of their undeserved and overpowering influence in the presidential nomination process.
Michigan, with 156 delegates, has scheduled a Jan. 15 primary. Democratic Party rules prohibit states other than Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina from holding nominating contests before Feb. 5.Despite what I think was a noble effort for a worthy cause, it can only hurt Michigan's influence as it is now totally irrelevant irrelevant as not only will it lose its delegates but most of the major players on the Democratic ticket have asked to have their names removed from the ballot and have promised not to campaign, thus accomplishing the complete opposite of the goal to make Michigan more important in the selection of the 2008 presidential nomination process. The presidential primary has become a joke with states jockeying for better position, leaving the schedule up in the air so long and moving the schedule so far ahead that most people will just be starting to pay attention to the race only to find it already decided with an eternal general election to follow that will leave the country despising both major party candidates once again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
