Herd Watching

By now anyone who is following the Democratic party in this run up to the 2008 elections knows that something amazing happened on Saturday…

The DNC Rules committee has just thrown away any moral authority they had gained from crying victim about the voting process in previous elections. In the process, they have alienated critical voters and revealed their presumptive “candidate for change” as a classic example of corrupt Chicago politics.

Let’s recap briefly for the kids in the back of the class… put down those spitballs, this is important:

• For a variety of reasons*, both Florida and Michigan held their primaries earlier than the DNC wanted.
• As a power play within the DNC elite Obama decides not to appear on the MI ballot when he had every possibility to do so.
• Hillary won big in both places.
• The DNC rules committee decided, ultimately, to punish Florida by reducing it’s voting power by 50%.
• The DNC rules committee decided, ultimately, to punish MI by simply re-writing the results of their elections.

It is that last one that is, to me, the clear signal that any claim to ethical behavior or a commitment to the democratic process has entirely left the DNC power brokers. It might have been defensible (but wrong) to simply eliminate MI or punish them like Florida. However to absolutely throw away an election and decide that you somehow know how people would have voted and then simply re-write the results? insanity. Pure insanity.

“I can hear the Republicans now.  The Chicago-style Democrats aren’t even lining up dead people to vote anymore, they’re now using imaginary voters!” - TeresaInSnow2 commenting on TalkLeft

Already then we see a party insider structure so arrogant that it will dismiss or modify election results at a whim to suit it’s own purposes. The questions that come to my mind immediately after that are why they would do so… and how they thought they could make it stick.

In looking at the why, it becomes clear that there is more to it than simply the politics of this election. If all that was in play was the 2008 race then Obama’s handlers should have pushed for a full seating, without penalty, of FL and MI. It almost certainly would not have prevented the super delegates from voting for him and pushing forward his nomination. It would have been a hugely popular move and almost certainly would have taken the fight out of many Hillary supporters. Instead Obama’s mouthpiece opposed the full seating, but like Obama himself tried hard to avoid having to say anything of substance out loud.

The only reason not to allow MI and FL to vote at full strength, as they actually voted, is to break the back of Hillary supporters within the DNC power structure and complete the overthrow of the DNC by Obama’s handlers. This was a naked demonstration of power and a sign that absolutely no mercy will be granted.

Some Obama supporters appear to confuse “Unity” with “submission.” - madamab commenting at TalkLeft

They sent this message at the cost of their own rules. They sent this message at the cost of any claim to the sanctity of the voting process. They sent this message without any attempt to hide the obvious discarding of the DNC’s own charter. The message was simple… “Sit down, shut up and do what you’re told.”

What makes them think that they can abuse, insult, disenfranchise and ignore millions of voters in some of the most important districts in US politics with total impunity? It’s simple - they truly believe that democratic voters are simple minded reactionary sheep. The word used for this stranglehold is “unity”.

I don’t think they are confused at all. The genuinely believe that the party will fall in line… that the party has no choice but to fall in line. They use the rhetoric of fear and hatred to present their only case… abuse and threats.

“Glad to see you have absolutely no perspective at all in politics and would seemingly prefer to have an anti choice, pro war, mentally unstable John McCain as President simply because your chosen candidate in our party’s primary didn’t win. You should be so proud of yourself.” - Mavs4527 commenting at TalkLeft

This logic is based on the idea that Obama would be better than McCain. I happen to personally disagree on many, many levels but even if I were a Democrat who did thin McCain was a problem… why would I trust that anything I am told about Obama was true? He has weaseled, lied and slipped away from every single question about his character, he is almost unelectable, has deeply racist ties and now he has proven that he (and those who are running him) will manipulate the voting system itself to get what they want.

• How could you justify putting someone like that, and the type of person who will come with him, access to real power?
• How often will you let Obama and his crew ram indignity and abuse down your throats all the while demanding that you continue to chew and swallow in the name of “unity” - unity that will hand them power, of course.

I have never been a strong supporter of the DNC, but I usually believed that they were at least honest opponents with their own version of our national interests in mind. This is no longer true. The DNC is now in the middle of a revolution that will place in power a cabal of openly corrupt insider hacks who have declared war on anything approaching a fair process.

If I was a Democrat I would vote for McCain as president and a strong DNC congress / senate to keep him in check. There is no way in hell I would vote for Barack Obama.

Then again, I have some pride. Maybe most Democrats really are sheep.

* note: It’s complicated and involves both internal fighting within the DNC, dissatisfaction with the DNC party elite marginalizing some stated and clever tactics by Republican state legislatures

Popularity: 99% [?]