What Stood Out This Week - 2/10-2/16

The last few days were pretty active for our remaining candidates in this here primary season. So let's see What Stood Out This Week...

The Quitters

Mitt Romney - Mitt made himself relevant this week by endorsing John McCain. His two-hundred-or-so delegates are enough to put John over the top. That's probably just what Mitt had in mind when he started spending studio film budgets of his own cash to run for president.

John Edwards - So John was gonna meet with Hillary and then Obama. He met with Hillary, and then a "scheduling conflict" kept him and Obama from getting together. Rumors are flying that John's about to endorse Hillary. Insiders are saying that he's somewhat torn on the matter (heart goes to Obama, head goes to Hillary), and I think that if he wants a position (Attorney General!) in the next president's cabinet, he should just not endorse anyone and then work his ass off for the eventual nominee. As a fan of John's, I'll feel pretty disappointed if he comes out in support of Hillary.

The Republicans

Romney probably timed his support of McCain just right to make himself seem relevant for the Pubes. John had a rough time of things in the early part of the week, losing more southern states to Mike Huckabee. John came back to win the "Potomac Primary," but the Huckster made it close in Virginia.

McCain is still the nominee, but Huckabee won't quit. Maybe he's pushing to show that he's got enough support to be on the ticket as VP. Maybe he's just getting out there for the next run at the presidency. Who knows? But he shows no signs of stepping aside.

This will be my final mention of Ron Paul.

And I can't remember where I read this jewel of a rumor, but chew on this... A John McCain/Condoleezza Rice ticket. More war for oil, dear B&E readers.

The Democrats

It was a strong week for Barack Obama (or a tough week for Hillary Clinton, if you're a glass-is-half-empty sort of person). He's won eight contests in a row and has built up a formidable lead in delegates.

Wisconsin and Hawaii are up next for the Democrats, two more states expected to go Obama's way (beware of New Hampshire, voters!).

(Mike Gravel, I love you, but you no longer fit into my narrative of What Stood Out This Week. If you Stand Out, I'll give a Shout Out.)

The media love drama, so they're really enjoying calling Texas and Ohio (March 4) Hillary's Last Stand, It's Do Or Die for Hillary, Go Hard Or Go Home, etc., etc. I don't necessarily think they're wrong about that, but one can never underestimate a political candidate called Clinton.

No matter the final results of Texas and Ohio, because the Dems split their delegate count proportionally by vote, it's going to be very difficult for a) Hillary to re-take the lead based solely on the delegates who represent the people, and b) Obama to win enough delegates to clinch the nomination, thereby making these superdelegates irrelevant. (Someone asked, so I'm answering: We haven't heard about these superdelegates for a long time because someone has always run away with the nomination before they've been relevant.)

Anyway, if Hillary does poorly in Texas and Ohio, I think she'll lose much of her superdelegate support. If she does well, it really will come down to these superdelegates. And both candidates are lobbying hard in their own ways for them. Obama's asking his supporters to write emails to superdelegates. Hillary, Bill, and Chelsea are personally calling others.

I was reading a dude in my perennial favorite The Nation who said (I paraphrase), "A popular Beltway joke is that the most dangerous place in DC is between Chuck Schumer and a bank of TV cameras. But a more dangerous place might actually be between someone named Clinton and elected office."

Superdelegates give an enormous advantage to the insider, and no one wants to piss off a politician named Clinton.

And yet, no one fears pissing off the electorate. If Obama ends up with a sizable lead in delegates only to lose because of the superdelegates, a large portion of the Democratic Party voters will be disenfranchised. Even if it's our "legitimate process" it will look like a stolen election. Our country has a long history of screwing the black man, and it would be impossible not to count this as yet another example. I hope the superdelegates aren't too stupid to see this.

Finally, just one other side note: The New York Times ran an article about how the reported, unofficial vote tally from New York's Super Tuesday election overestimated Clinton's victory. They've been finding some pretty significant discrepancies. For example, 118-0 in Clinton's favor in districts where you also see Obama signs in windows. As they're doing the official tally, these counts are corrected (118-116, for example). It seems clear that Clinton still won New York, but Obama supporters are hoping to pick up another delegate or two. It makes me wonder if we've ever actually had a fair election in this country.

That's What Stood Out This Week, B&E readers.