Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Could Obama and Edwards Team Up in the Caucuses?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Paul Rogat Loeb Donating Member (107 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 05:17 PM
Original message
Could Obama and Edwards Team Up in the Caucuses?
Obviously Barack Obama and John Edwards are competing with each other, but the caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, and Washington State give the two campaigns a chance to also coordinate to maximize the delegates they gain. Edwards and Dennis Kucinich actually did this in 2004 in Iowa and it played a real role in Edwards's Iowa unexpected Iowa success. At this point he and Obama are competing with and even sniping at each other, but if they don't stop Hillary Clinton, she still has the inside track to the nomination. And for all that Obama and Edwards have differences, I think they're closer politically (and more progressive) than either are to Clinton, who voted for the Iraq War, supported the Kyl-Lieberman Iran vote that Jim Webb called "Dick Cheney's fondest pipe dream," and feel no shame in raising as much money as she can from Washington lobbyists. (Plus the regressive Democratic Leadership Council still features Hillary as part of their core circle). Both Obama and Edwards would gain by doing this, and the 2004 precedent suggests it's perfectly legal.

How would it work? The same way it did in 2004. At least in Iowa it takes a 15% threshold in any given precinct to gain a delegate. So both candidates will inevitably have people left over in most precincts who don't quite get them to that threshold. But what if both publicly pledged (and sent out instructions) that wherever that situation occurred, they'd try to combine so whichever of the two had more unrepresented attendees after all the efforts to convince stray delegates would get the additional delegate. If they had equal numbers left unrepresented, they could combine and flip a coin. It may sound like it would have a minimal impact, but multiplied by precinct after precinct it could matter.

Some of this will happen anyway, but it's be a lot more likely if Obama and Edwards openly embrace it, saying explicitly that they're doing this because although each thinks they'd be the best nominee, they also think that the other represents change more than does Hillary Clinton, which is true. If they teamed up explicitly, it would probably gain some headlines, and done right (maybe with a joint press statement or even a joint press conference) would seem less like their piling on a front-runner than drawing a necessary political line. I think it could only help.

It is a calculated risk for both in helping one of their likely opponents, but the first priority seems still stopping Clinton's momentum. And this also sets the stage for Obama and Edwards and their supporters to keep on working together in other ways, like on the convention platform. Then they can go back to laying out their areas of disagreement.

Ideally, again, they'd do this at a national level, but even if they don't, those of us participating in the caucuses can do what we can to forward this approach. My personal sentiments? Whatever the outcome, I'd be delighted if one of the headlines read "Hillary Clinton finishes third."




Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time. See www.paulloeb.org To receive his articles directly email sympa@lists.onenw.org with the subject line: subscribe paulloeb-articles









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. The "other than Hillary" voters will coalesce at some point.
Whether it's soon enough remains to be seen, but the votes are there to effect a very different outcome than "inevitability."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Ah...come now...Hillary's campaign was not about inevitibility....her single most important cause...
"I'm in it to win"

When in US history has a campaign been so based on personal political gain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. With the exception of hating both of their health care plans (HR 676 or Bust!)...
...I can't think of a good reason not to be very attracted to such a coalition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. There are plans for this...
The particulars haven't been laid out yet. Those are finalized later in the week.

Rest assured, this tactic will be happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. *fingers crossed*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. No
If you look at the second choice polls Obama and Edwards are both the second choice of each other's supporters...If they did what you suggest one is sure to come in third and a third place finish would definitely finish Edwards and a third place finish would cripple if not finish Obama too...

HRC would be wounded by a third place loss in IA but not finished...However, under the scenario you suggest it's almost mathematically impossible for her to finish third...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slick8790 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Not really.
The way the the Kucinich/Edwards agreement was in 2004 was that supporters would switch to the other when their first choice wasn't viable in a precinct. So kucinich supporters would only go to edwards if kucinich wasn't viable at that precinct anyway, and vice versa. There are almost 2000 precincts in Iowa, and obama and edwards are sure to not be viable in at least a few. An agreement like this would only really hurt Clinton, or perhaps some of the second tier candidates. It's entirely mathematically possible for her to be third under this scenario.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. Hillary will finish fourth....third is a pipe dream for her!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. Yesterday it was a request for Kucinich voters to hook up
with Obama or Edwards to "stop" Hillary. Today it is a request for Obama and Edwards to hook up to "stop" Hillary. It won't be long before there will be a request for Gravel and Thompson voters to hook up to "stop Hillary." Something tells me that you will be rather disappointed at what the headlines will say before this is all over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I was just about to say that
Creepy stuff.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Why Would Obama And Edwards Team Up To Ensure The Other Finishes Third
Mathematically that's the only conclusion you can draw...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. That is not the OP's main concern
He's mostly interested in "stopping" Hillary from a first place finish. I'm surprised that those supporting the candidates he's trying to "hook up" have not reached that conclusion yet...:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. So He Expects Edwards Or Obama To Self Destruct To Prevent Hillary From Coming In First
That doesn't make sense... And it would have to be Obama who promises to self destruct because Edwards would look like a joke if he ran as VP again...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. That's today's stunt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. They wouldn't
I could sooner see Edwards and Clinton team up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. DSB has pointed out below what's in store
Edited on Sun Dec-30-07 06:25 PM by desi
for either Obama or Edwards should they go along with such a ridiculous stunt. Third place finish.

Edit: DSB's post is above now LOL...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
15. Only if Obama people caucus for Edwards, lol.
Neither are my candidate, but the best possible outcome in Iowa, or anywhere else, would be for HRC and Obama to come in 7th and 8th.

From my perspective, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paul Rogat Loeb Donating Member (107 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Neither Edwards nor Obama gives up any delegates under this approach
Edwards and Obama each go for all they can, but then team up to split any fractional delegates that don't make the cut--like if one has four people and the other three people in a given precinct and it takes seven for a delegate. It increases the likelihood that they finish first and second, and Clinton finishes third.

And yes, I have been posting repeatedly on this, because I think there's a major political gap between Clinton and the rest of the Democratic candidates, and that her regresive stands past and present make her distinctly less preferable. So I admit to spending a bunch of energy (and what money I can) in trying to nominate an alternative

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I'd rather see all those delegates go to
the 2nd tier candidates, myself. I hope the 2nd tier people work with each other to make sure that one or two will be "viable."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-31-07 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #16
21. As long as the fractional splitting doesn't
cause too much friction?

I think I understood exactly what you were trying to say -- pooling resources that would otherwise be completely wasted makes sense. It's only a few percentage points, but it could help both of them.

You're not making a plea for either candidate's delegates to fall on their swords, or douse themselves with gasoline, but some of the replies earlier in this thread assume the presumption that there's some sort of mathematical certainty, that such a tactic would do just that?
Would you call that deliberate disinformation, or would one of the earlier posters care to explain how a cooperative strategy --- adding up otherwise wasted fractions, to make something out of nothing -- can "torpedo" either of the cooperating candidates?

It really makes sense to me -- I'm still undecided between Edwards and Obama, anyway, with a fair amount of interest in what Kucinich and Richardson have to say, but our state's primary is still weeks away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-30-07 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
20. Well, a call to supporters to support each other if not viable would be possible....
Edited on Sun Dec-30-07 07:38 PM by earthlover
it could also be done for each of them to tell their supporters to caucus for anyone except hillary in case they are not viable. That would be enough to make the impact.

I can see why obama caucusers would not want to caucus for edwards and vice versa....but if you make the one rule, don't vote for hillary...then the direction is clear. Maybe they could find enough to caucus for biden or richardson, which would be preferable to either edwards or obama supporters,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-31-07 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
22. Who needs a RW conspiracy???
Between DU and Huff...:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Dec 11th 2024, 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC