Primary Dates -- Gaming the System Doesn't Pay

Neil Conan and Ken Rudin were discussing the Presidential nomination races this afternoon on NPR's Talk of the Nation. They discussed the tussle over whether or not to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates.

I'm torn. The democracy guy in me says every voice should be heard. The Obama-leaning guy in me doesn't want to sound like I'm just trying to rain on Clinton's collapsed coronation parade (eight straight wins for the other guy are enough for that). But the debate coach and rules guy in me says we have rules for a reason. As Rudin points out, the Democratic National Committee set its rules well ahead of the primary season. Florida and Michigan knew the rules (and the consequences) and chose to buck them. The Democratic candidates pretty much all agreed to play by those rules and campaigned as if those rules were to be enforced. To change the rules after the fact and seat the delegates might be as harmful to a fair democratic process as sticking with the rules and excluding Michigan and Florida from the Democratic convention in Denver.

Rudin also twists the knife on Michigan and Florida with this observation: In 2004, Michigan held its presidential primary on February 7; Florida, March 9. Michigan and Florida moved their primaries up in hopes of gaining more attention and having more influence in the race. Had they not gamed the system, had they left their primaries on their 2004 dates, Michigan and Florida would have been huge players in the most hotly and lengthily contested Democratic presidential race in years.

Oh well -- that's just that much more money Clinton and Obama can spend in May on ads on KELO, in the Madison Daily Leader, and in the Madville Times! Yahoo!

(And don't forget, big New York media: the cabin is still yours to rent during your coverage of the South Dakota primary!)

Update 14:02 CST: See this post about the fun Ted Olson is having speculating about what a court challenge to the DNC's ruling on Florida and Michigan could look like.]

Update 22:13 CST: To seat or not to seat:

With every delegate precious, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers also made it clear that they were prepared to take a number of potentially incendiary steps to build up Mrs. Clinton’s count. Top among these, her aides said, is pressing for Democrats to seat the disputed delegations from Florida and Michigan, who held their primaries in January in defiance of a Democratic Party rules.

Mrs. Clinton won more votes than Mr. Obama in both states, though both candidates technically abided by pledges not to campaign actively there.

Mr. Obama’s aides reiterated their opposition to allowing Mrs. Clinton to claim a proportional share of the delegates from the voting in those states. The prospect of a fight over seating the Florida and Michigan delegations has already exposed deep divisions within the party.

Julian Bond, the head of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, called for the delegates to be seated, saying failure to do so would amount to disenfranchising minority voters in those states. But on Wednesday, such a move was denounced by the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York, who said many people in those states did not go the polls because they assumed their votes would not count [Adam Nagourney, "Obama's Lead in Delegates Shifts Focus of Campaign," New York Times, 2008.02.14]