tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post1790806941103171398..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: Half and Half: The Florida and Michigan StoryJosh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-64754627898678070982008-06-01T16:59:00.000-04:002008-06-01T16:59:00.000-04:00These are all good points. The Republicans combat...These are all good points. <BR/><BR/>The Republicans combated frontloading in 2008 the same way they have fought it since 2000 for the most part. But they aren't as interesting in the prevention of frontloading because their goals are slightly different. The Dems want a bottom-up, inclusive approach to nominee selection, whereas the Republicans are more interested in quickly choosing someone that the elites are firmly behind. The frontloaded system then, is something that is beneficial to the goals of Republican nominee selection. At the same time, it is a concept that bothers some Democrats based on the idea of inclusion. <BR/><BR/>So if we couch the prevention of frontloading in normative terms, then yes, the Democrats are probably closer to preventing states from violating the sequencing aspects of the delegate selection rules. However, is that something that the Republican Party is genuinely interested in? We will get a better idea of that this summer at their convention. How far the <A HREF="http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2008/04/frontloading-under-fire-ohio-plan-gop.html" REL="nofollow">Ohio Plan</A> makes it will tell that tale.<BR/><BR/>MSS,<BR/>Yes, the rules matter, but as I said just last week, <A HREF="http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2008/05/rules-matterbut-luck-does-too.html" REL="nofollow">so too does luck</A>. McCain benefited from several well-placed contests with some rules that were advantageous to his pursuits. <BR/><BR/>This is a good discussion, everyone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-72415534188074992102008-06-01T16:06:00.000-04:002008-06-01T16:06:00.000-04:00mss,You make excellent points. I concede the petal...mss,<BR/><BR/>You make excellent points. I concede the petal-strewn path due to the undemocratic selection process. However, if Michigan and Florida had gone on Tsunami Tuesday, I think McCain's victory in Florida would have been obscured by all of the other contests, and he might not have won the nomination. Huckabee could have concentrated elsewhere, and Romney had the money to possibly have won California with both primaries on the same day. By finishing off Romney in Florida, Huckabee did not have a chance. A three-way battle coming out of Tsunami Tuesday would have made it difficult for McCain to succeed.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-44844966737430707802008-06-01T15:19:00.000-04:002008-06-01T15:19:00.000-04:00Robert makes an excellent point about the GOP sanc...Robert makes an excellent point about the GOP sanction not working.<BR/><BR/>However, if the Republicans did not use winner-take-all (statewide in Florida, once then sanction was imposed, and mostly by CD in Michigan), those states would not have matter nearly so much.<BR/><BR/>Romney and McCain would have closely divided the Michigan delegation and Florida would not have been decisive for the nomination. <BR/><BR/>Romney won 80% of Michigan's (halved) delegation on 39% of the vote, and McCain won 100% of Florida's on 36%, having shortly before won 79% of South Carolina's on 33%.<BR/><BR/>McCain had quite a petal-strewn path to the nomination, and it had more to do with undemocratic delegate-allocation rules than with sanctions for violating national party rules.MSShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14199636437911986505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-77864919350533151742008-06-01T12:58:00.000-04:002008-06-01T12:58:00.000-04:00An interesting play. Actually the Republican solut...An interesting play. Actually the Republican solution didn't work if the objective was to prevent frontloading in future elections. Michigan kept Romney in the race, and Florida gave the nomination to McCain. The two states actually benefited from their movement. They mattered. For the Republicans it was more about momentum and timing than it was about the delegates. <BR/><BR/>If the Democrats has instituted the same strategy, Clinton would have probably won both places (but by lesser margins) and it could have influenced the vote on Tsunami Tuesday. They would have been willing to have sacrificed the delegates for the attention and influence. By taking away all of the delegates and then giving them back, they humiliated the two states and reduced their ability to make a difference.<BR/><BR/>Thus, I think the Democrats did closer to the right thing than the Republicans. Now we will see how the Democrats can find a way to unify. Also, it will be interesting to see if this example will have any effect on frontloading for 2012. It seems to me that it will embolden Republican party operatives at the state level and stifle Democratic party operatives.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.com