Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

What Does the Muddle Mean?

By Joel Achenbach
Still crunching numbers here, looking at absentees in American Samoa, reading the exits from Alaska, etc., and the one obvious conclusion is that the contest for the Democratic nomination may be decided by the very frightening Credentials Committee mentioned yesterday by Howard Dean. The Credentials Committee will try to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates at the convention, even though they are supposed to be punished for their jumping-the-gun impunity. That will, in turn, incite lawsuits galore -- really apocalyptic stuff with heavy hitters emerging from the Palm and the Capitol Grille to let fly with legal briefs that will curl the hair on your back. And that legal case will surely go all the way to the Supreme Court.

Which means that, as in 2000 with Gore v. Bush, it's going to come down to the whim of Justice Scalia.

Don't be shocked if at the end of this whole thing, the Bush family declares martial law.

Someone find out where Jeb is.

[As a journalist, you have to think ahead, anticipate the next story, get in position to pounce on news the moment it rears its nasty little head. I'm on the next plane to Florida.]

Look at your map for a moment, and discern the pattern: Clinton won New York, but Obama won Illinois. Clinton won New Jersey, but Obama won Georgia. Clinton won Oklahoma, but Obama won Colorado. Clinton won Arizona, but Obama won Utah. Clinton won California, but Obama won Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Delaware and a bunch of other small ankle-biter states that could make California run to higher ground. And so on.

Pattern: A perfect muddle.

Continue reading at Achenblog>>

By Washington Post editors  |  February 6, 2008; 10:33 AM ET
Categories:  A_Blog , Joel's Two Cents  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama: 'Our Time Has Come'
Next: McCain Pleased With 'Breadth' of Win


I wonder if Obama would accept the VP slot?

Posted by: JakeD | February 6, 2008 10:57 AM

With the preliminary delegate count at 709 Obama and 783 Clinton, the race moving to several states that may favor Obama, and Obama's January fund raising of $32 million compared to Clinton's $13.5 million, I suspect Obama's answer would be a resounding no.

Longer term I think serving as a Clinton VP would actually weaken his position as an agent of change.

In a similar fashion an Obama/Clinton ticket still brings all the Clinton haters of both parties into the mix, probably to Obama's detriment.

I don't see much of a hope of the "dream ticket" in either version. Without Clinton Obama is stronger and with her he is weaker.

I am hoping that Obama chooses Edwards as a VP or one of his white female congress supporters.

Posted by: IndependenceEveWonderlandBallroom | February 6, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I'm with cpaustin408 too. It'd be disgusting to have a legal battle over how many delegates from FL and MI should get seated. Just re-do the primary. A re-start seems to be a fair punishment for jumping the gun and it looks like they'll get all the attention their parties wanted in the first place.

Posted by: somua2 | February 6, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I agree with cpaustin408 -- GO OBAMA!!!

Posted by: JakeD | February 6, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

The DNC must stand by its original decision that the bogus primary votes from Michigan and Florida not be counted and that the delegates from those states not be seated at the convention. To allow those delegates to be seated would be changing the rules after the game has been played and likely would trigger a disastrous fight within the party. If the DNC wants to avoid such a fight and give those two states a chance to be represented at the convention, it should come up with a plan to schedule new voting in Michigan and Florida that would give both remaining candidates the chance to compete fairly on equal footing.

Posted by: cpaustin408 | February 6, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

I wonder if Obama would accept the VP slot?

Posted by: JakeD | February 6, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company