Mark Terry

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

The Michigan Primary

January 15, 2008
Today is the Michigan Primary. I wrote about my annoyance with this earlier, but I wanted to point out some things to people who might be watching the horse race, such as it is.

First, the date was moved up. The DNC censored Michigan's democratic party as a result and supposedly the results of today's primary won't count for anything because the DNC says they won't accept the delegates. To which I can say, as a registered democrat: "DNC, go fuck yourself."

Chances are, whoever wins today's democratic primary will then grant amnesty to Michigan. (To which I can say, as a registered democrat: DNC, go fuck yourself.:)

Why did the Michigan democratic party (and ME!) think it was a good idea for Michigan (and we're not alone, because Florida and Nevada and Wyoming moved their's up, too) to move up their primary?

I'll tell you why and we have a perfect example. I can explain it in two words: BILL RICHARDSON.

"What?" you say? Yes, Bill Richardson. Who dropped out of the race after losing the New Hampshire Primary. Now, I don't know if I would have voted for Richardson in the primary if he had stayed in. I might have. It's a moot point now because he's no longer running for president. (It's a double moot point, because the only candidate on the ballot today is Hillary Clinton. More on that in a moment).

From a strictly resume point of view, Bill Richardson is probably the most qualified candidate. I thought every time Hillary Clinton tried to hammer home the point that the country needed somebody more qualified than Barack Obama in office, that Governor Richardson should have looked at Senator Clinton and said, "Thank you for the endorsement, Senator Clinton." He after all has been ambassador to the UN, Secretary of Energy, a congressman and a governor. He has hands-on experience in all the areas the U.S. is currently having problems with--energy and international relations.

But the man ain't in the race no more.

Anyway, as I said, it's a double moot point. If you're a republican in Michigan, feel free to vote for one of your monkeys--Romney, Huckabee, McCain, et al. (And just a note to all you republicans who want to vote for McCain--the man is currently 71 years old, the same age Reagan was in his 2nd term. He'll be 72 by the time he gets into office. Better find out who he plans to have as vice president--now!)

Anyway again, if you're a democrat (to the DNC: Go fuck yourself), you essentially have two choices. You can vote for Hillary Clinton or you can vote for UNDECIDED.

YOU CAN NOT WRITE IN YOUR DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY CHOICE--IT WILL CANCEL YOUR BALLOT. 

It's either Hillary Clinton or UNDECIDED. (And you know, I'm not entirely sure why that is the case, but it is, and from what I can see, it's pretty damned stupid).

Somebody in the Michigan democratic party has suggested rather than just moving our dates up, the DNC (Well, you know how I'm feeling about you right now, don't you?) and RNC should consider a rotating schedule, so that some elections it starts in the south and some elections it starts in the midwest and some in the west and east, etc, rather than to have this Iowa, New Hampshire, Carolina trifecta that dominates the candidate selection process.

Gets my vote.

Cheers,
Mark Terry

4 Comments:

Blogger Josephine Damian said...

Mark, thanks so much for explaining a process I've been scratching my head over.

As a FL Dem, I foolishly believed I'd have a choice on my ballot (not that our FL votes are even counted anyway), but WTF! it's Hillary or the highway?

Vilsack was my man. He dropped out a long time ago, so I feel your pain over losing Richardson.

8:53 AM  
OpenID eric-mayer said...

The Dems won't rest until they find some way to blow the general election. It doesn't make sense to start the process in freakish places like Iowa and New Hampshire anyway. I know New Hampshire voters are said to be ornery but those two states are essentially conservative which means that progressive candidates like Kucinich for example never get a chance to have their message highlighted while guys like Huckabee do.

10:07 AM  
Blogger Mark Terry said...

Eric, I agree with you on both points.

Yes, all states have different issues, but Michigan differs from Iowa and New Hampshire these ways:

1. One of the largest international borders in the U.S.

2. An economy heavily based on manufacturing, and as a result...

3. Currently has the highest unemployment in the U.S., at 7.9%, and has lost 300,000 jobs since 2000.

4. What else is going on in Michigan economy? Agriculture and tourism. So even the "illegal" immigrant issues is a big deal in Michigan due to the summer crops season.

5. Largest Shiite Muslim population outside of the Middle East.

Every state has its issues, but I think Michigan is probably more representative of the U.S. than either Iowa or New Hampshire.

And as my wife puts it: this election is the Democrat's to lose.

10:45 AM  
Blogger spyscribbler said...

You're kidding?! I don't understand. I need to go look this up and get up to speed.

That's absolutely terrible! I'd be furious!

11:08 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home