Rational Solution To The Michigan Vote, Here’s How

I have a problem with the current demand of Clinton to include the Michigan delegates in the delegates that would vote for her.

She got 55% percents of the votes and she didn’t even have to compete with Obama. Andrew Sullivan analyzed  that if Obama was part of the race then even unknown he would have won by 4%. This analysis can be explained in further details as Ron Chusid has done:

A situation where the names on the ballot but nobody campaigns is still not a fair assessment of Obama’s strength. I’ve assumed that he probably would have won by around 4%, as some polls showed him leading after he was receiving more national attention. Clinton would have done well with the blue collar vote, preventing a big win for Obama. Obama would beat Clinton among the black voters, the more affluent suburbs such as in Oakland County, and in college towns such as Ann Arbor. Portions of western and northern Michigan would vote more like Wisconsin and Illinois keeping the race close.

I don’t know if it possible to know who would have won the primaries in Michigan if they were held in accordance to the rules. I only know that splitting the delegates is fair.

I feel that I keep writing about problems with Clinton and the balanced ways of Obama. It has nothing to do with the personal preferences but to the fact that Clinton is the more “complaining” candidate so a lot of attention is given to her complaints.

From past experience if someone is so “problematic” during the primaries he will never be a free of this behavioral traits later on.