The benefits of a long Primary.

I have resigned to find the positives in a Primary that lasts until the Convention. For one, my NC vote may actually mean something this time. And that is what many voters across the country have been getting to say.

This Primary is going into every state, and that is a good thing. It builds the ground organization, fundraising abilities, and involves voters who are usually ignored. It gets the voters vested in the outcome, and eager to return in November.

It keeps the Democrats on the front page, dominating the news cycles. It gives us ample time to sharpen our attacks on McShame.

Going into every state will perfect Dean's 50 State Strategy. Every state will have gotten attention and mobilization. It has to be a good thing at this point.

Over 25 million voters have cast a vote for a Democrat, and we still have 14 states to go.

and has been noted, he cared nothing for a strong party infrastructure for 2004 and had no interest in Dem voters even getting to know their Dem nominee better.

Bill's 2004 book tour was all about himself and his support for Bush's decisions on terrorism and Iraq war, so there was no real block of time voters had to get to know their own nominee.

that many Americans have been feeling over the past 20 years...

to make people apathetic has its own rewards, and the people have been corraled for a long time...

fewer voters is good for those who want to steal America...limiting any feeling of civic participation & power serves to let the 'big boys' do whatever they want with their 'what you gonna do?' attitude...

it might be archaic, but there ain't nothin' like a good fight...

the turnouts in the primaries are more disconcerting to many power-elites than even the MSM reveals...what if people actually started participating in their government again?

hooray for 50 states and all...the more the merrier, the merrier the better....

Nobody's buying the shit he's selling, not even the RWers. He's already tied to public financing, he's very limited in what he can do.

Right now he's BROKE and we're missing the change to damage him unequivocally. Its not a smart move.

Obama is starting to work him over. I am still hopeful Hillary will take this opportunity to leave on a high note.

but I really doubt it.

Carrboro! :hi:

Let's give Obama a big win here in NC!!!:toast: :bounce:

:toast:

An acrimonious fight for months, ending in a brokered convention, produces a mortally wounded candidate. There's really no way around that.

Sheesh! :eyes:

I just don't believe in shying away from unpleasant scenarios just because I don't like them.

Meaning, we would have our candidate after the first round of votes at the convention. It will be dependent on the SuperD's for sure, but that was already the case.

I see Hillary trying to bargain to be on the ticket, but even if she stays in until the Convention, Obama will lead in PD's, states, pop. vote and money.

I am still hoping she bows out while she can. I see it as she can chose when to accept the lose. Now, next week, after MS, or after the first vote of the Convention.

Obama needs to hit back, now. No more being reactive, he needs to be proactive. He is great at rapid response, counter-attack, but he needs to get in charge of the conversation.

1st of all, having the primaries extended keeps the far right machine off balance -they don't know who to focus on.

2nd, if things come out now, they're perceived as coming from a Democratic source, which has an effect of "pulling the teeth of the tiger." Lawyers often use this tactic to ameliorate the effect of potentially damaging facts on cross-x.

3rd -if somethng really is damaging, there's still an option to go another direction- or even a "none of the above."

4th: the Obama campaign has shown that it needs practice with damage control (among other things). The more practice they get in the run-up, the harder it will be for the far right and their echo chamber to steam roll them (as happened with Kerry and his kumbaya coronation and aftermath).

Finally- as the OP notes, it really DOES enfranchise people and keep the interest up, and also has the side effect of mobilizing state organizations for the fall.

Republican will have no such advantage- though, given that they hold so many more cards in terms of organization and media play, all this really does is narrow their "lead."

first of all, the right doesn't have to do jackshit, dear. If you have two candidates tearing each other up, all the right has to do is sit ringside and take note of who's damaged where, and stow it away for later use. Both Clinton and Obama already have far higher negatives than McCain. Don't think they won't go higher in the next few months? LOL!! In the meantime, McCain will be consolidating his base and making a big play for independents and disaffected dems- particularly white males.

Seeing the damage being done now as an antidote to future damage in a general campaign, is foolish in the extreme. Damage doesn't just magically go away because sweet little dems want it to. It's there to stay.

I'm skipping number three because I don't see it as germane.

Your last point is true only up to a point: At a certain point people start getting turned off and apathy or antagonism takes over. Or both.

And you ever so conveniently left out the brokered convention part where approximately half of those invested in the campaign of the candidate who isn't chosen, feels disenfranchised.

Oh, and this has nothing to do with sour grapes. I've been writing about this here for 2 months. A brokered convention is a cluster fuck.

FDR for instance- 1st time out went in on the 5th ballot!

In fact, these sorts of conventions were common until the late 1960's. They were interesting and exciting- people paid attention -which, considering the turnout in America these days- is something we need more than most anything.

They were nothing like the snorefests of 2000 and 2004. The latter, with its "no Bush Bashing" mandate, was particularly boring and, as we saw -counter productive.