Dems should not re-do primaries

Tough call. Do you stick to your guns if you’re the Democratic Party and not count delegates from the Florida and Michigan primaries due to their thumbing of their noses at the party rules? Or, do you relent to the angry masses who demand a new primary be held in those states during this close election year? And, by the way, this little re-do would cost $20 million in Florida alone in a time when the economy is reportedly spiraling downward.

As a point of ‘I told you so’ before I get going, I said just a month ago in a column that the fairest way to do primaries is to have them all on the same day, that way these maverick states couldn’t jump out of line trying to be the next New Hampshire and Iowa. And face it, New Hampshire insists on having its primary first since it generates an estimated $100 million in income for a state that would otherwise be lost in the mix.

What happened in the cases of Florida and Michigan is they too, like New Hampshire and Iowa, wanted to set themselves apart and capture a piece of the money pie being spent by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They thought they could do this by moving up their primaries ahead of Super Tuesday, thereby making the candidates spend millions of dollars specifically in their states. However, the Democratic Party forbade them moving up their dates, but Florida and Michigan defied their marching orders, prompting the heavy punishment against those states in not counting their delegates.

I say Florida and Michigan need to take their punishment instead of whining about not getting counted. They knew the probable result of their actions when they did it and were hoping the Democratic National Committee would back down when push came to shove. Now that the race is close and the results could come down to super delegates at the convention, they are making another push, this one perhaps costing the party, the candidates or the states over $20 million to do it all over again.

And, if I were Obama, I’d be mad at the party for even considering it, seeing he didn’t put his name on the ballot in Michigan where there was an agreement not to run in that state. Wonder why Clinton was on the ballot there?

In Florida, Obama lost to Clinton, who despite their agreement not to compete there, celebrated it as if it were a win. Of course, there were other candidates also on the ballot in Florida at that time.

To back down and submit to the pressure of Florida and Michigan at this point would make the Democratic Party look weak and indecisive, something that would transfer right on to whoever is its candidate for president. This would not be a good thing for a candidate running at a time when we’re at war and nearing a recession.

The thing is neither candidate can take a real public position on the Michigan/ Florida issue since they could alienate the voters there if they are against the re-do. On the other hand, they look wishy-washy, weak and not fiscally responsible if they are for the re-vote. This is why the DNC needs to step in immediately, for the sake of its White House aspirations, and put an end to any speculation of counting the delegates or having a re-do.

Or, instead, they could simply bring gas down to $2 gallon and let me get the NFL Network on cable and they’ll get my vote if they run Daffy Duck.

Duane Sherrill is a reporter for the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].