To make one more point on the Clinton campaign's promise to try and re-seat the Michigan and Florida delegations, its getting a bit annoying to watch them discover brand new principles as soon as they become politically useful. I never, not once, heard anyone in the Hillary Camp say the real test for the candidate was how they did in huge, heavily-Democratic states like California and New York. Rather, before she lost a bunch of small states, I kept hearing that her experience in upstate New York would assure her the Missouris of the world, which Democrats needed. I never, not once, heard anyone in the Clinton campaign denigrate the representative nature of caucuses when it look like they might win Iowa. Never, not once, did they respond to a poll showing Hillary in the lead by saying, "hey, it's just a caucus, and basically undemocratic." Now, of course, they want caucuses not to count. Fine, that's politics. Similarly, when the DNC decided to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegations, I never, not once, heard the Clinton campaign stand up stop the whole thing from happening. They stayed silent, and even assented to the DNC's decision. Clinton's campaign manager released a statement saying, "We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process, and we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role." So for those in comments pretending this is all a matter of principle, come off it. The rules may have been bad ones, but they were bad ones that the frontrunner's campaign could have changed. She could have skipped Iowa and argued against the caucus system. It would have been a huge deal had she taken that stand. Much more to the point, she could have kept Florida and Michigan in the process, or demanded a different compromise (The Republicans, for instance, stripped the two states of half, rather than all, of their delegates). But she didn't. Hell, she could even ask to rerun the elections in Michigan and Florida, either as primaries and caucuses, and seat the delegates emerging from those contests -- that would be the decision if you were worried about them missing out on the campaign. But she did none of those things. And sure, it's politics, Clinton is angling for advantage, if a bit cynically. But that judgment is not where the conversation stops: If it's cynical, risky politics that brings a lighted match and a can of gas near the Democratic coalition, it should be named as such, and its consequences understood, and it should become part of the complex calculus we're all building to help us understand these campaigns.
