Every four years the parties have their own internal re-alignment struggles, and those in turn have profound effects on how the national parties exercise their power over their members in office, and what they aim for in their national agendas both overt and covert. We tend to think of the parties as monoliths, but they're really coalitions of thousands of smaller state and county parties and special interest groups (and their subdivisions) all with their own competing agendas, all fighting for power and position within the national parties to advance their own interests and agendas through the aggregated political influence of the national parties.

Once someone understands that, things like the Florida and Michigan flap gain crucial context and aren't nearly so puzzling.

I moved the link you noted in your comment (to your article from your blog) up into the body of my article above so it can be more readily seen. Very cohesive. Thank you.

dr.e

Seriously, the nomination is only one ring of the election-year circus, even though it's usually the only one anyone pays any attention to.

Gore, Bloomberg, that really does seem like fantasyland thinking, I'd agree. The LIbertarian Nat Convention is here weekend after next. I hope to go. I hear Bob Barr is going to try hard. I also hear distant thunder ref Murtha, but havent heard on that for a long time.

I just wonder, if we all were gamblers (re this dem nominee process), if we'd win big at the blackjack tables by placing our bets and knowing when to hold…. or if we'd be out on the sidewalk wearing barrels. lol

dr.e

This idea of super-labile superdelegates. I keep thinking maybe we need super-super-ultra-super delegates who aren't quite so maybe-I-will and maybe-I-won'tish (technical term)

dr.e

(Save it for the convention! That'll drive the TV ad revenues to all-new heights.)