For some interesting weekend / holiday reading, I would direct you to this editorial from Tallahassee, Florida, which debates the merits of having the RNC throw its backing so quickly to Charlie Crist in his upcoming bid for a Senate seat. We can dispense with my opinion on the subject fairly quickly here: I think primary races are always good. Sometimes it can be difficult to man up and stick to that policy, such as during last year’s Democratic presidential primary. Yes, it was too much of a challenge for me to not lose my temper and begin yelling for somebody to pack up her marbles and go home, but really that’s mostly because I just really, really, really don’t like Hillary Clinton. But in the end, even I must admit that it was a good, needed process. The two had to hone their craft every step of the way and battle it out in all fifty seven states along with a couple of districts to boot.

When the economy collapsed and there was still a Republican in the White House, the race was essentially over, so that primary pretty much served as our presidential election. (This is not to say I’m blaming John McCain for the collapse of the economy, but he was surely one of its first victims.)

In Florida it’s a bit of a muddled picture. As soon as Gov. Charlie Christ decided that he was running for Senate, the RNC threw its weight, money and arm-twisting power behind him. Unfortunately, this was before anyone really stopped to consider what that might mean to state house speaker Marco Rubio, who is also eying that Senate seat with a hungry look on his face.

Here comes the interesting dynamic for you political junkies. Crist is the moderate, more in the mold of mavericky John McCain, let’s say. Rubio is the fire and brimstone conservative. Should the state party and their primary voters be left to make the choice they like best? Or might the national party be in a “Mama knows best” mode and need to have a say in it? My heart tells me the former, but the pragmatic side of my brain may be leaning the other way.

Florida has been a swing state for some time now, (just look at the 2000 election again if your stomach can stand it) but the fact is that it has been slowly and gently swinging in the Democrats’ direction this past decade. A similar parallel can be found up near me in Pennsylvania, where Pat Toomey can fill in for Rubio in our story.

Our Editor in Chief recently noted that self identified moderates and independents have been on the upswing for some time now, and this year they account for 39% of the voters, with Democrats taking 33% and the GOP scooping up the remaining 22%. Yes, you always want to sing to the base as much as possible, but the numbers are up on the board for all to see. The sad fact is that, as a Republican, every single member of your base can stay home on Election Day and the Democrats can turn out every last one of their members. But if you manage to carry almost all of the middle, you still win. It’s a funny old world, isn’t it?

So hard core conservative party members in Florida and Pennsylvania might follow their hearts and pick Rubio and Toomey, but then potentially get slaughtered in the general election by slightly more numerous Democrats who don’t scare off as much of the middle. If that’s the case, should the national parties be stepping in to say, “Sorry guys. We know how much you love this candidate, but we really need a win here and your guy is going to get demolished. We need to back a winner.”

Or is that the antithesis of democracy? Should we even have national campaign organizations for the major parties anymore?