Popular Vote Fist-Pounding

Wow. There is a lot of underwear being tied into all sort of knots over the issue of who is winning the popular vote in the Democratic primary. Eschaton, Talking Points Memo, Shakesville, Alas, and plenty of others have been weighing in on this topic... actually, 'weighing in' isn't really the right word. Rules lawyering is more appropriate. Because not only is it important who has the popular vote, but how that popular vote is calculated. Do you count Michigan and Florida votes? If so, do you count all the votes or a percentage? What about caucus results? Do you count uncommitted votes? If so, who gets them?

It reminds me of a game of Dungeons and Dragons I was running once. One of my players, whose character was an impulsive monk not terribly unlike himself, wanted to try to wrestle a balrog to the ground. Per the rules, I had him roll to compare his strength against his opponent's. He failed. He became irritated, and wanted to be sure I'd included all the bonuses he was entitled to as per the official Player's Handbook section on grappling. Finally, I pointed out, with exasperation creeping into my voice, that it didn't matter, because he was trying to wrestle a 30-foot tall demon made out of fire, and no amount of bonuses was going to change the fact that he was a 3-foot tall halfling without a suit of asbestos armor.

The point is, it doesn't really matter who has the popular vote. By one person's standards it might be Obama, and by another's it might be Clinton. There is no need to argue over who is right, because it makes no real difference. Popular vote doesn't count for anything other than unofficial bragging rights. Even if you argue that it might sway the votes of superdelegates, all the argument proves is that the votes are close enough that the delegates should choose based on other criteria. It's just arguing for the sake of arguing. And not just tossing out an opinion here and there, but epic-length diatribes calling into question every popular-vote-grappling rule in the DNC Player's Handbook. This is what the Democratic party has been reduced to.

Remember how Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000? Remember how much that mattered? All it did was give Gore supporters something to put on bumper-stickers after the election was over. So hopefully I'll be excused for worrying that this pointless argument doesn't bode well for the unification of the party after the nomination is made. You will have people stridently claiming Obama's win was illegitimate because he didn't win the popular vote. Scott Lemieux at Lawyers, Guns and Money, in the post that seems to have set off the latest volley of 300-pound marshmallows, appears to agree, but then legitimizes the argument by participating in it. This is not helpful.