Michigan Exists!

On Meet The Press for Sunday, May 1, 2008, Tim Russert asked Harold Ickes, Senior Advisor to the Clinton campaign, about the campaign's claim that "seventeen million Americans have voted for Hillary Clinton, more than for any primary candidate in history." This exchange ensued:

MR. ICKES: Well, we're going by the AP projections, and we're counting both Michigan and Florida. And, and in our...

MR. RUSSERT: You're counting Michigan when...

MR. ICKES: Yes, we're counting Michigan.

MR. RUSSERT: ...Senator Obama's name wasn't on the ballot?

MR. ICKES: We're counting Michigan. He voluntarily took his name off the ballot, Tim. There was no party rule, no exhortation from the Democratic National Committee. He, he--it was a voluntary, strategic choice that he made. He could have kept it on there.

MR. RUSSERT: But Senator Clinton said it didn't count for anything...

MR. ICKES: Well...

MR. RUSSERT: ...but now it counts for everything.

Tim is very skeptical of the idea of counting the results of Michigan's primary in calculating the total popular votes nationwide of the two candidates.

That was a legitimate, and perhaps sound, position as of May 30, the day before the Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic National Committee met in a Washington hotel and decided that the delegates and superdelegates from both Florida and Michigan would be seated, with each individual granted a half-vote. Of Florida, Clinton was granted 105 (52.5) and Obama 67 (33.5) delegates. Of Michigan, based on exit poll and other data (which favored Obama), Clinton was granted 69 (34.5) and Obama 59 (29.5) delegates. Delegates won by Clinton in the two primaries were allocated to her while Obama was allocated delegates won in the Florida primary and in Michigan, the vast majority of the "uncommitted" delegates. The two primaries were held, the party has decided that the delegations will be seated and delegates will vote. And now....

The Michigan primary never happened?

Sorry, folks, but the Michigan primary occurred. The party now has acknowledged that it did and has acted accordingly. Hillary Clinton won those popular votes in Michigan. Barack Obama and John Edwards, in part to curry favor with Iowa voters, took their names off the ballot. And the ploy worked. Not only did Obama win the Iowa caucus (admittedly primarily for other reasons) but HRC came in behind Edwards. It was effective strategy in the critical first-in-the-country vote, with the only downside that Obama has no popular votes (but a lot of delegates in a state he probably wouldn't have won, anyway) to count toward his national total. All in all, a good tradeoff.

Concession From Ickes

The bluff and bluster- or self-confidence- of Harold Ickes, Senior Advisor to the Clinton campaign, was on display on the May 1, 2008 edition of NBC's Meet The Press. When asked by host Tim Russert "Should Barack Obama offer Hillary Clinton the vice presidency to unite the party?" Ickes replied "We don't think that that's going to be necessary. Mrs. Clinton will get the nomination."

Moments later, this exchange took place:

MR. RUSSERT: When, when will this be over?

MR. ICKES: MR. RUSSERT: Could that happen Wednesday?

MR. ICKES: It could. Anything could happen.

And what will happen this week was noted, fairly casually, by Russert's next guest, former South Dakota senator Tom Daschle, now a national co-chairman of the Obama campaign. Russert asked of the Illinois senator "assuming he gets half of the delegates of Montana, South Dakota, Puerto Rico, with proportional allocation, he would need about 20 superdelegates. You've been leading the fight to secure the superdelegates. Will you have those 20 in hand by Wednesday morning?"

And Daschle responded

Well, Tim, we're not making any predictions with regard to schedule, but I think we're going to have a nominee before the end of this week. I don't think there's any question. A large number of superdelegates were holding back, waiting until the last vote was counted, and then they're going to step forward. I've had many, many conversations. I, I, I, I am quite confident that you're going to see a--an overwhelming number of superdelegates declare this week.

After Russert followed up, Daschle assured him "well, they're going to declare, and we assume that, that the vast majority of them will be for Barack Obama."

No one seriously questions Daschle's analysis. Meanwhile, a major spokesman for the Clinton campaign concedes "it'll be over when one candidate secures the number for the nomination." He seems to be conceding the nomination to Barack Obama which, as I will argue in a later post, is premature, despite Daschle's impeccable math.

Bob Dole's Fantasy

Jonathan Martin of Politico.com reports an e-mail sent on May 29, 2008 by former Senator (R.-Ks.) and Repub presidential candidate Bob Dole. I repeat these excerpts from the message (confirmed by Dole spokesman Michael Marshall) because they are so entertaining:


There are miserable creatures like you in every administration who don’t have the guts to speak up or quit if there are disagreements with the boss or colleagues. No, your type soaks up the benefits of power, revels in the limelight for years, then quits, and spurred on by greed, cashes in with a scathing critique.

In my nearly 36 years of public service I've known of a few like you. No doubt you will 'clean up' as the liberal anti-Bush press will promote your belated concerns with wild enthusiasm. When the money starts rolling in you should donate it to a worthy cause, something like, 'Biting The Hand That Fed Me.' Another thought is to weasel your way back into the White House if a Democrat is elected. That would provide a good set up for a second book deal in a few years.

(I won't read your book) "because if all these awful things were happening, and perhaps some may have been, you should have spoken up publicly like a man, or quit your cushy, high profile job.

That would have taken integrity and courage but then you would have had credibility and your complaints could have been aired objectively. You’re a hot ticket now but don’t you, deep down, feel like a total ingrate?"


Having no degree or professional experience in abnormal psychology, I can't comment much on the nature of the man behind these attacks. But the issue raised by Dole and others- why didn't he resign?- does remind me of one Cyrus Vance.

Cyrus Vance became President Jimmy Carter's Secretary of State in 1977. He resigned in a letter written to President Carter on April 21, 1980 in protest of the upcoming Operation Eagle Claw. On April 24, 1980 this secret military mission was undertaken to rescue the 53 American hostages held in Tehran, Iran. Eight U.S. servicemen and one Iranian civilian died in the failed venture, which contributed to Carter's defeat by Ronald Wilson Reagan in the 1980 presidential election. The resignation was announced on April 28, 1980.

Wilkipedia's entry for Operation Eagle Claw does not mention Mr. Vance, nor do most Americans remember him. He is little remembered, and less so commemorated, despite- or perhaps because- he had the integrity to resign when he strongly disagreed with a policy decision made by the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.

So when the Bush Administration apologists, sycophants, and hacks castigate Scott McClellan for failing to "quit your cushy, high profile job" (as if they ever would consider such a courageous act), please remember Cyrus Vance. Someone has to.

Quote Of The Week

"No matter what went wrong, she was somehow able to keep her hands cleans."
Former Bush 43 Presidential Press Secretary Scott McClellan , in What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception, on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice

On McClellan

You've heard some of the prominent members of the Bush administration, past or present, criticize former press secretary Scott McClellan for the revelations in his new book "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception."

Karl Rove (former Deputy Chief of Staff and chief strategist): "First of all, this doesn't sound like Scott. It really doesn't. Not the Scott McClellan I've known for a long time. Second of all, it sounds like somebody else. It sounds like a left-wing blogger. Second of all, you're right. If he had these moral qualms, he should have spoken up about them."

Dan Bartlett (former White House counselor): "Scott McClellan was not the press secretary. He was the deputy press secretary who dealt with domestic issues. So, he would not have even been really have access to the types of meetings and deliberations that the president participated in."

Dana Perino (White House spokeswoman): "Scott, we now know, is disgruntled about his experience at the White House. For those of us who fully supported him, before, during and after he was press secretary, we are puzzled. It is sad. This is not the Scott we knew."

Ari Fleischer (former White House press secretary): "I'm just scratching my head about this book. There are just parts of here that just do not sound like Scott McClellan. So it's got his name on it, and Scott knows that, he's said the chips will fall will they may. ... But on principle and on policy, this doesn't make any sense to me because if it did, I think Scott would have expressed it privately and repeatedly."

The attacks on McClellan have one thing in common: no one denies what he said- no one has said that it is simply not true. Fleischer comes closest- it "doesn't make any sense to me" obviously comes from someone not in a position to know one way or another. One of Rove's remarks is the most amusing: "if he had these moral qualms, he should have spoken out about them." Here the rhetorical question of MSNBC's David Shuster is appropriate: "are Administration officials trying to do with McClellan what officials did to war critic Joe Wilson?" And to the attacks upon Scott McClellan because he participated, however unwittingly, in the Administration's coverrup, MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked "what's wrong with a whore escaping the whorehouse?"

But I give the Bushies some credit for their response to Scott McClellan's charges: in choosing not to deny categorically the accusations, they displayed an uncharacteristic reluctance to lie.

What Could McCain Be Thinking?

Alert The Wall Street Journal (and the mainstream media, generally): I am not a knee-jerk free trader, though some people have used a portion of that phrase to describe me. Even if I were, I would wonder whether John McCain is in touch with reality. In a speech delivered on May 20, 2008 in Miami, Florida for Cuban Independence Day, the Arizona senator said

We have made progress toward this vision by expanding the benefits of free commerce, through NAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement, and our free trade agreements with Peru and Chile. But the progress has stalled; our longstanding bipartisan commitment to hemispheric prosperity is crumbling. We see this most vividly in Barack Obama's and Hillary Clinton's opposition to the free trade agreement with Colombia. The failure of the Congress to take up and approve this agreement is a reminder why 80 percent of Americans think we are on the wrong track.

Maybe there are other reasons for Americans believing our nation is on the wrong track. Consider:

-the mortgage crisis- according to USA Today, "about 2.3% of prime loans were 60 days' past due in February, the highest level in at least a decade, according to data from FirstAmerican CoreLogic LoanPerformance. That's up from 1.4% a year ago."

-gasoline costs- according to U.S. government statistics, the average price for a gallon of regular gasoline on 4/21/08- after prices began to rise- was 350.8 and on 5/26/08, 393.7, a rise of 42.9 cents; the average price of all grades of gasoline over the same period rose from 355.7 to 398.6, a rise also of 42.9 cents. That's an increase of over 8 cents per week.

-Persian Gulf II- There now are over 4,000 American soldiers who have died in Iraq with no end to this war in sight.

-Corruption- At least ten (10) officials of the Bush Administration have been indicted and/or found guilty of criminal offenses; another twenty-four (24) have resigned due to investigation or because of pending investigation or allegations of impropriety.

Still, the Repub who will be nominated for president believes that failure of Congress to pass the "U.S.-Columbia Trade Promotion Agreement" (Columbia Free Trade Agreement) is a reason that 79% of Americans believe the U.S.A. is on the wrong track and only 15% that our nation is on the right track. Either John McCain is divorced from reality, or he believes that he can delude us voters. But could he really be that elitist?

A Task Ahead

While Barack Obama ponders whether to offer a woman such as Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius the nod as his running mate, the BBC's Katty Kay made on the May 25, 2008 episode of "The Chris Matthews Show" a comment with major implications for his decision. Kay stated of Obama:

And he's probably going to end up having a tougher problem with the poor white men who have voted for her than with the women who have voted for her.

It is almost self-evident that a large percentage of the women who have voted for Clinton in the primaries/caucus have done so in part because she is a woman and, probably, the vast majority are on the left side of the ideological divide. Consequently, they probably will return to the Democratic column in November. But most of the men who voted for the New York senator did so for a different reason: she is not Obama. Whether Obama is too liberal, black, cosmopolitan, patronizing, inexperienced, or gaffe-prone for them, men less so than women were embracing Hillary Clinton- and more were rejecting Barack Obama. Getting them to pull the Democratic lever in the fall will not be easy- and would be made even harder by putting a woman on a ticket already poised (with a black man) to make history.