Yesterday evening, the Democratic rules committee reached a decision about Florida and Michigan. The delegations would be seated with half-votes instead of full votes, and for Michigan, some of the delegates (including a handful that would otherwise have gone to Hillary Clinton) were allocated to Barack Obama, who did not appear on the ballot.
As a result, Clinton nets a few dozen delegates, but not enough to make a meaningful dent in Obama’s lead. When the last primaries end on Tuesday, Obama will be in striking distance to the nomination, but will probably not have bagged it. But he’ll be the nominee, barring something really extraordinary.
* * *
I’m a registered Democrat, and I consider the Bush victory in 2000 the closest thing to a coup d’etat that our country has ever experienced. I really don’t want to vote Republican this year, but if Clinton were to win the nomination, I’d have to vote for John McCain.
On the other hand, There’s a lot that I like about Obama, most of it stuff that seems to tick everyone else off. I like that he listens to people who don’t believe that the US is the most wonderful country on the planet, and that he’s an intellectual with a conceptual view of the world.
Part of me likes that Obama is willing to open discussions with our enemies, but he underplays the difficulty of actually doing that: he’ll be swimming with the sharks, and if he’s not careful, he’ll get his leg bitten off.
But when it comes to Iraq, he’s lost me. Both Obama and Clinton believe that our next task with Iraq is getting out. While our adventures in Iraq were ill-advised at best, the next President must play the hand that he is dealt. McCain was refreshingly honest when he remarked, a few months ago, that we might be in Iraq for 100 years. In other words: Brother, you bought yourself a protectorate.
The Iraqi government is making progress in organizing itself and preparing to function as an independent state. But it’s a difficult job and cannot be accomplished on a timetable driven by American politics. It’s not, as some (including Obama) imagine, that the Iraqis are imply lazy, and if we simply hold their feet to the fire, they’ll buckle down and solve all their problems.
If we move out in 2009, we endanger Iraq’s progress, and in turn we risk destabilizing the region. None of the advocates for withdrawal has come up with a good answer to that.
Obama has an answer, but it’s not a good one: he plans to talk to Iran and hope they’ll make nice. It’s one thing to talk to our enemies, but it’s quite another to expect that they will act in our interest–instead of theirs–as an immediate result of such talking.
I’d like to vote for Obama, but in some respects he makes it really, really difficult.