Betsy's Page
HOME
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Betsy neither necessarily uses,
nor endorses,
the products advertised on this site.
The truth about Avesil
Cheap Hosting
Atlanta Bankruptcy Attorney
Dallas Bankruptcy Attorney
Wikio
Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights
Online Bachelors Degree
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Thursday, August 30, 2007
The demise of party power
National conventions have degenerated into four-day celebrations for each party and an opportunity to get some prime time TV coverage. The one thing they haven't been is the method for choosing a candidate. Since the rise of the primary system in the 1960s, the conventions have lost their traditional role. And now, even the pretense that conventions choose the nominee is being cast aside. As states ignore the Democratic Party's rules about when they should hold their convention and schedule primaries earlier and earlier, the DNC has retaliated by saying they'll take away Florida's convention votes. Now, Michigan is also planning to leapfrog the DNC's schedule and will probably face the same penalty.
But the news story is that the candidates don't seem to care. They seem to be indicating that they will campaign in Flordia and Michigan even though those primaries won't be awarding any convention delegates. The publicity that they would garner for coming in first in such important states trumps the fact that such victories would be meaningless in terms of getting delegates for the convention. We're at the point that the buzz a victory would generate is more important for a candidate than actual delegates to the convention. Those delegates are just human faces tied to votes that have already taken place in the primaries. And winning the publicity from a Florida and Michigan contest can propel a candidate past the finish line in other states.
Jay Cost, one of the most perceptive political commentators on the web bemoans the loss of party power. He comes up with several scenarios when Florida's lack of votes at the convention could be crucial and denying Florida the vote could come back to bite the Democrats.This is where the decisions of both parties regarding Florida could be trouble. What happens, for instance, if Obama wins the Florida beauty contest, finishes second at the convention, and the difference between first and second place is roughly the number of Florida delegates that Obama would have netted? What if Obama's second place finish is not as strong, but Edwards is willing to toss his delegates to Obama to avoid giving Hillary the nomination, and that Obama's Delegates + Edwards' Delegates + Obama and Edwards' Excluded Florida Delegates = Clinton's Delegates + 1 Delegate?Personally, I think it's much more likely that there would be a divided convention is much more likely for the Republicans than the Democrats. I don't see Obama or Edwards dropping out early. They will continue to split the anti-Hillary vote and she'll do just fine with or without Florida's votes. But whatever happens, both parties need to take that long-awaited step towards reforming the whole primary system. All this punishing of states because they have the temerity not to recognize the sacred, inviolable role of Iowa, New Hampshire, or South Carolina in our electoral system.
There are many different scenarios in which the exclusion of Florida's delegates would be of great consequence - and essentially all of them are negative. I am not saying that any of them are likely. But I am saying that if one of them did happen it would probably be terrible for the Democrats. It could yield a floor battle not fought simply over who is the better person to represent the party in the general election, but also over who has been treated fairly. This kind of fight over policy and process could be really, really messy. And, of course, the Republicans would quickly and gladly chortle that the Democratic nominee is "illegitimate," etc.
Like I said, I do not consider this to be likely - but remember that your expected utility from a given event is calculated by the probability that an event will occur multiplied by the payoff you will yield from the event if it occurs. This kind of "two-dimension" convention battle might be a low-probability event, but if it did occur, the payoff would be highly negative. This is why I think this was a dangerous strategy for the DNC to adopt.Labels: Election 2008
0 comments
Comments:
National conventions have degenerated into four-day celebrations for each party and an opportunity to get some prime time TV coverage. The one thing they haven't been is the method for choosing a candidate. Since the rise of the primary system in the 1960s, the conventions have lost their traditional role. And now, even the pretense that conventions choose the nominee is being cast aside. As states ignore the Democratic Party's rules about when they should hold their convention and schedule primaries earlier and earlier, the DNC has retaliated by saying they'll take away Florida's convention votes. Now, Michigan is also planning to leapfrog the DNC's schedule and will probably face the same penalty.
But the news story is that the candidates don't seem to care. They seem to be indicating that they will campaign in Flordia and Michigan even though those primaries won't be awarding any convention delegates. The publicity that they would garner for coming in first in such important states trumps the fact that such victories would be meaningless in terms of getting delegates for the convention. We're at the point that the buzz a victory would generate is more important for a candidate than actual delegates to the convention. Those delegates are just human faces tied to votes that have already taken place in the primaries. And winning the publicity from a Florida and Michigan contest can propel a candidate past the finish line in other states.
Jay Cost, one of the most perceptive political commentators on the web bemoans the loss of party power. He comes up with several scenarios when Florida's lack of votes at the convention could be crucial and denying Florida the vote could come back to bite the Democrats.
0 comments
National conventions have degenerated into four-day celebrations for each party and an opportunity to get some prime time TV coverage. The one thing they haven't been is the method for choosing a candidate. Since the rise of the primary system in the 1960s, the conventions have lost their traditional role. And now, even the pretense that conventions choose the nominee is being cast aside. As states ignore the Democratic Party's rules about when they should hold their convention and schedule primaries earlier and earlier, the DNC has retaliated by saying they'll take away Florida's convention votes. Now, Michigan is also planning to leapfrog the DNC's schedule and will probably face the same penalty.
But the news story is that the candidates don't seem to care. They seem to be indicating that they will campaign in Flordia and Michigan even though those primaries won't be awarding any convention delegates. The publicity that they would garner for coming in first in such important states trumps the fact that such victories would be meaningless in terms of getting delegates for the convention. We're at the point that the buzz a victory would generate is more important for a candidate than actual delegates to the convention. Those delegates are just human faces tied to votes that have already taken place in the primaries. And winning the publicity from a Florida and Michigan contest can propel a candidate past the finish line in other states.
Jay Cost, one of the most perceptive political commentators on the web bemoans the loss of party power. He comes up with several scenarios when Florida's lack of votes at the convention could be crucial and denying Florida the vote could come back to bite the Democrats.
This is where the decisions of both parties regarding Florida could be trouble. What happens, for instance, if Obama wins the Florida beauty contest, finishes second at the convention, and the difference between first and second place is roughly the number of Florida delegates that Obama would have netted? What if Obama's second place finish is not as strong, but Edwards is willing to toss his delegates to Obama to avoid giving Hillary the nomination, and that Obama's Delegates + Edwards' Delegates + Obama and Edwards' Excluded Florida Delegates = Clinton's Delegates + 1 Delegate?Personally, I think it's much more likely that there would be a divided convention is much more likely for the Republicans than the Democrats. I don't see Obama or Edwards dropping out early. They will continue to split the anti-Hillary vote and she'll do just fine with or without Florida's votes. But whatever happens, both parties need to take that long-awaited step towards reforming the whole primary system. All this punishing of states because they have the temerity not to recognize the sacred, inviolable role of Iowa, New Hampshire, or South Carolina in our electoral system.
There are many different scenarios in which the exclusion of Florida's delegates would be of great consequence - and essentially all of them are negative. I am not saying that any of them are likely. But I am saying that if one of them did happen it would probably be terrible for the Democrats. It could yield a floor battle not fought simply over who is the better person to represent the party in the general election, but also over who has been treated fairly. This kind of fight over policy and process could be really, really messy. And, of course, the Republicans would quickly and gladly chortle that the Democratic nominee is "illegitimate," etc.
Like I said, I do not consider this to be likely - but remember that your expected utility from a given event is calculated by the probability that an event will occur multiplied by the payoff you will yield from the event if it occurs. This kind of "two-dimension" convention battle might be a low-probability event, but if it did occur, the payoff would be highly negative. This is why I think this was a dangerous strategy for the DNC to adopt.
Labels: Election 2008
Comments:
Post a Comment
