Since you were a kid, you always wanted to be first. You wanted to be the first one to open Christmas presents, the first one to get the new "Goosebumps" books or the first one down the stairs for dinner. You also wanted to have the most — baseball cards, Pogs, play sets, those tiny cars the rich kids sometimes had. There were even times when you just wanted to be even and get the same amount of dessert as your brother. It’s easy to forget that we really haven’t changed that much since we were kids. We want what we deserve, and forget what we have. So as Florida and Michigan face sanctions from the Democratic Party for scheduling their primaries in January, let’s not forget the nature of politics: bargains among folks just like you and me.
The Democratic National Committee is no stranger to playing the role of mother, and has offered to allow a nonbinding January contest with delegates awarded later. Florida has rejected the compromise, even though DNC rules say explicitly that only four states may hold a presidential primary before February 5: New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina. Now, each state’s Democratic Party is preparing for legal action and the DNC has little choice but to send them to their rooms without any delegates.
Still, there is merit to the argument that New Hampshire and Iowa shouldn’t be first based on outmoded tradition. With the predominance of minority voters in national Democratic politics, why let two overwhelmingly white states decide the frontrunner? On the other hand, generations of inhabiting the penultimate presidential stomping ground have made Iowa and New Hampshire voters among the most educated in the nation. The only way to win their votes is to show up on a doorstep, dust off the old soapbox and ask politely. In modern America, this can’t work on a national scale, but this populist ideal is worth holding on to. Plus, the recent rescheduling of the South Carolina and Nevada primaries finally gives minorities a voice early in the process.
While the Democrats’ capacity to screw up a sure thing has proven boundless in recent history, this dispute borders on absurd. Yes, it’s not fair that certain states get to vote before them and therefore have more influence on the nomination process. Yes, it is pretty fishy that one of the new January-approved states, Nevada, is home of the Senate’s majority leader, Harry Reid. Yes, Florida and Michigan officials are trying to ensure maximum representation for their constituents, but for the sake of your party, enough with the "me first" crap. Sure, everyone wants to be in front of the line, but it shouldn’t be at the expense of the rest of the class.
Impending legal battles between state politicians and national Democrats will only aid the GOP, especially as candidates are barred from campaigning in Florida and Michigan. Indeed, Republicans are already encouraging voters to switch allegiances and vote in an election that matters. Meanwhile, prominent Democrats never miss an opportunity to publicly scold the national party, further opening the door for their rivals on the other side of the aisle.
A spread-out primary calendar is vital for Democrats, who are especially wary of the influence of money in the electoral process. After all, a massive multipronged campaign based in disparate regions around the country would require an even more massive fundraising operation. It would virtually eliminate the chances of a relatively unknown, underfunded candidate charming voters with retail politics and gaining national acclaim. In short: Interest groups would become the most important primary contest. No offense to the liberal activist community, but good luck getting Moveon.org’s preferred candidate into the White House.
The major candidates have, with one notable exception, sided with the national party and are withdrawing from the Michigan and Florida ballots. Hillary Clinton will remain to collect her victory and opposing campaigns are delighted to have an excuse for losing two large states: "I didn’t even sign up, I didn’t even show up, and I wasn’t even trying."
So while Michigan and Florida sit in a dark room with grumbling stomachs, better-behaved states, like Wisconsin, wait patiently for their turn. We should be comforted by the knowledge that our votes will be represented by delegates, while theirs will be a footnote in the media narrative. Although it might be wrapped up by the time it comes to us, nothing compels us to vote for whoever won the other states. If all of us would vote based on our research and philosophical ideals, it wouldn’t really matter which states got to choose before us. Instead of moving their primary, voters in Michigan and Florida should move away from the TV set and the media-fabricated notion of political momentum. Voting for a sure winner means everyone loses.
Bassey Etim ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science and journalism.
