Mich. & Fla., not this issue again?!?

I realize that his motivation is to “make nice” with the political people of Michigan and Florida so that Democrats in those states feel a need to go to the polls on Nov. 4 and vote for Barack Obama for president. But dredging up the tainted nature of the primary elections in those two states has the potential to anger more people than are pleased.

Specifically, Obama sent a letter Sunday to Democratic National Committee officials letting them know he no longer has objections to those state being given full representation at the party’s presidential nominating convention in Denver.

BACK IN THE days when the primary election was in full swing, that would have been a controversial move – one that would have surrendered a significant advantage to the campaign of opponent Hillary R. Clinton.

But now that an overwhelming majority of the “super-delegates” have promised to back Barack in Denver, he no longer needs to be concerned with holding down Clinton’s delegate count.

And considering that convention officials have promised to give Hillary a prominent speaking spot during the convention, I would guess that Obama is not concerned that Clinton would try to resurrect her suspended presidential campaign and steal-back some delegates at the convention to be held at month’s end.

In terms of “just the facts, ma’am,” what this does is gives Clinton a higher delegate count, because she was the winner of the legally flawed primary elections held in those two states. History will record her as having failed to gain the presidential nomination by a lesser margin than she appeared to have lost when she quit actively campaigning back in early June.

IT ALSO TAKES away the ability for future generations of historians to say that the elections in Florida and Michigan were legally flawed, even though they were.

With that potential snub out of the way, Obama would hope that Democratic leaders in those two states will quit thinking of themselves as being snubbed by their political party and will take a more intense interest in getting their states’ electoral votes into the Obama column on Nov. 4.

Currently, those states are sending delegations to the Democratic National Convention at only half-strength. Every single delegate gets to go to the weeklong political pep rally to be held in Denver, but their votes only count for half.

That was the resolution reached back in May by the Democratic National Committee as the penalty for elections officials in those two states jumping the gun and trying to bolster their states’ political influence by holding elections earlier than what was usually their turn in the several-months cycle of 57 primaries and caucuses that determine who gets to be the Democrat who can seriously dream of being U.S. president.

I WAS OF the belief then that the two states did deserve some sort of punishment for trying to hold earlier-than-usual elections, and I was never of the belief that replacement elections should be held – unless officials in Florida and Michigan were willing to assume the full cost of conducting them.

Officials in those two states never were willing or able to do that (elections cost money, and take time to prepare for). But this issue was one for the past – one of those bits of rhetoric that will be reviewed when the election cycle is complete.

Now, due to his letter to DNC officials, Obama has resurrected it.

How many Hillary-ites who have been smouldering at the defeat of “their girl” are going to use this as an excuse to let loose with their anger?

ARE WE GOING to start hearing again about the 18 million-plus people who voted in primary elections for Clinton over Obama, thereby allowing her fans to spin the facts to claim she won the political primaries? She did, but she lost the caucuses very badly, and it is a combination of primaries AND caucuses that determines who gets to be the nominee.

Has Obama managed to create a hole big enough to Clinton fans to try to resurrect her campaign? Even if Hillary herself doesn’t rise to the occasion and try to steal pledged super-delegates from Obama (it’s only a verbal pledge, and is not legally binding until the vote is taken at the Democratic convention), could this split never become healed – thereby giving Republican John McCain a serious chance to actually win come November.

Obama’s maneuver also is giving the GOP’s loyal followers factual material to try to claim he can’t make up his mind about anything.

Despite McCain making a fool of himself with campaign ads trying to link Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton (Paris’ mother is miffed, calling the campaign ads “a waste of money” – some of which was donated by the Hilton family – and Paris herself claims her image was used without her permission), it remains a close race.

A GALLUP ORGANIZATION tracking poll during the weekend showed the two men tied at exactly 44 percent apiece. Even their most recent tracking poll shows Obama with such a slim lead (only 1 percent) that pollsters admit it falls within the margin of error and the race could still be a tie.

It would appear that stirring up old grudges is worth the risk to Obama, considering that the significant working class white populations of both states, particularly Michigan, is showing signs of swinging to McCain – unless Democratic organizations in those states start taking an active interest in promoting Obama’s campaign.

Michigan is a state that narrowly went for the Democratic presidential hopeful in both 2000 and 2004. But Obama’s intellectual appeal to one segment of the country is being blamed by political pundits for having the potential to drive that state into the McCain column.

And in Florida, Obama’s best chance of taking the state that went Republican in the two most recent presidential elections is to take the growing Latino vote in that state, which is showing signs of abandoning the ways of the aging Miami Cubano exile community – surveys of the Latino voter bloc in Florida show that in 2008 they identify by a 2-1 ratio with the Democratic Party over the Republicans (although about one-third of Latinos in Florida say they are “independent”).

WITHOUT THOSE TWO states, Obama would have to take significant numbers of electoral votes in smaller population states that in recent political history have trended for the Republican.

So while I understand why Obama wants to “throw a bone” to Michigan and Florida, it is a risky strategy. The 2008 Democratic presidential primary was ugly (although the general election is showing evidence of topping it), and we could get reminders during the nominating convention.

For his sake, Obama had better accept the presidential nomination with rhetoric so powerful and appealing that it will go into the history books alongside his moment at the ’04 convention (when he went from being an obscure Illinois legislator with a non-Anglo monicker to an inspirational figure within the span of 22 minutes).

It had better not be a moment only memorable because his campaign staff had the ego to think he could back a 75,000-seat football stadium.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Now that it no longer makes a difference in terms of who gets the nomination (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/08/obama_seeks_full_florida_michi.html), Barack Obama wants, “Democrats from all regions of the country and all backgrounds and walks of life to have a meaningful voice,” according to his weekend letter asking for Michigan and Florida to receive full representation at the convention later this month.

It will be interesting to see what kind of reaction Obama draws from the political faithful in Lansing, Mich., who turn out on Monday (his 47th birthday) for his speech on potential (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080803/NEWS15/80803025/1001/NEWS) energy policies in an Obama administration.

In between preparations for the Olympic Games beginning Friday, Chinese news junkies have the potential (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/04/content_8934691.htm) to read about the latest Obama antics.