Grace after the fire

GRAND LEDGE -- Hillary Clinton is so over it.

The primary ping-pong, that is - the bitter battles with Barack, her husband's crimson face and wagging finger, the endless wrangling over every state, every superdelegate.

It all seemed to wash away as a Zen-like Hillary took to the stage Saturday and bestowed her message on the mostly female crowd of 1,000: Move on and vote Obama.

Maybe it's the distance. Maybe it was Friday's debate and the harrowing financial meltdown that hasn't fazed the kid from Chi-town one bit, while the impeccably experienced John McCain swan-dived into a full-scale panic. But Clinton seemed genuinely impressed with Obama in a way she never was when they engaged in hand-to-hand combat.

"I'm campaigning as hard as I can to make sure he's the next president," she announced with almost maternal pride. "I think last night people saw why."

Decked in a canary suit as sunny as her demeanor, Clinton radiated a laid-back warmth to a clearly smitten crowd. (There wasn't a PUMA (Party Unity My Ass) miscreant in sight). Instead of having to make the sale for herself in a pressure-cooker primary, she could relax and merrily dispatch McCain while pumping up Obama.

Losing such a brutal, close contest was devastating, no doubt. Many pundits believed she'd hole herself up with astringent aides Lanny Davis and Howard Wolfson, resurfacing to give aid and comfort to the GOP with unhelpful comments about Obama. ("He did admire Kwame Kilpatrick immensely, I know that.")

But Hillary's grace and enthusiasm has surprised even this cynical columnist, admittedly not her biggest fan. I don't know that Obama would have been able to pull off what she has if the roles were reversed.

Often sour and steely in her own race, Clinton has transformed herself into the happy warrior. This was supposed to be John McCain's role, instead reduced to a scowling septuagenarian lecturing baby Barack that "he just doesn't understand" anything, when it's his running mate who can't name a single newspaper she reads, another Supreme Court case besides Roe v. Wade or any of his maverick reforms ("I'll try to find you some and I'll bring 'em to ya.")

Is it real? Who knows? No one can say what's truly going on in someone's head. Maybe Clinton is giving a Cannes-worthy performance and will be punching her ballot for McCain on Nov. 4 anyway. She no doubt is looking ahead to 2012, just in case, as is one Mitt Romney.

But publicly, she is all-in in '08 and apparently has told Bill to get with the program, prompting him to (finally) say nice things about Obama while barnstorming Florida this week.

No one could have predicted what an effective surrogate Hillary has become for her former rival. Indeed, she's Obama's best defender, an emissary to women, although they're flocking back on the Barack bandwagon in droves since Sarah Palin has proven to be a national embarrassment.

Clinton's sheer depth on policy issues and effortless intellect underscores Palin's indignant incuriosity and startling cerebral shallowness, which even a skeptic like me underestimated. The McCain campaign clearly chose style over substance, but to flagrantly do so with someone a heartbeat away from the presidency is political malpractice.

But even on the surface, Clinton's down-home "I feel your pain" routine plays better than Palin's faux populism, since she's not really concerned with building "Joe Sixpack" up, as she refers to her constituency, but on cattily tearin' the elitist haters down. I believe we refer to that as goin' for the lowest common denominator.

What the 2008 election will ultimately mean for women is anyone's guess. I tend to believe that Clinton coming so close will motivate more women to jump into public life and push harder for a female president next time. That's one reason why so many women were initially drawn to the McCain-Palin ticket, before they came down with buyer's remorse.

But the failure of Palin could have the opposite effect. Some women who remember the Gerry Ferraro days tell me that Sarah's set up to be the fall gal when McCain goes down. She's the airhead hottie who never could be trusted with the launch codes, scuttling the chances of an honorable war hero who could have restored this country's glory.

Chicks, huh?

Forgive and forget, part II: Republican Joe Schwarz has broken his silence about the 7th District congressional race and endorsed state Sen. Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek. This won't come as a shock to anyone who watched the bloody GOP primary two years ago when U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton, and his Club for Growth overlords disemboweled him as a liberal, baby-killing freak.

But it did catch longtime pundit Bill Ballenger a little off guard.

"Schwarz and Schauer are supposed to be good buddies, though Schauer screwed him over a few times," he observes.

Like Mark recruiting the former congressman to run as a Dem, swearing he wouldn't run himself (oops)? Or neglecting to give him credit for keeping open the Battle Creek Air National Guard Base?

I hope Mr. Schauer manned up said he's sorry. Because Schwarz just did him a huge favor, at his own political peril.

Palin: McCain's version of 'Trust me'

For years, Republicans have foamed at the mouth about Michigan's blonde bombshell governor, slamming her as woefully inexperienced and working in her "Dating Game" past whenever possible.

Now I've often shared their critiques of Jennifer Granholm in terms of policy and management style and I have it on pretty good authority that her senior staff despises my column. But that kind of patronizing tripe ignores her Harvard law degree (with honors), four years as attorney general, four years as a federal prosecutor and almost six years as governor.

Our governor has an almost unmatched intellect and is the state's most spellbinding speaker. Republicans will privately admit they wish they had anyone on their roster who could rival her. Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, shakes in his boots around her to this day.

So when John McCain made his utterly ridiculous pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be a heartbeat away from his presidency, I found it fascinating how Granholm's hecklers (a bunch of middle-aged white guys, natch) suddenly turned into raving feminists.

There was a lot of happy talk about breaking the glass ceiling from boys who oppose the Equal Pay Act.

"(Palin) puts the voice of women on the center stage of American politics," declared state Sen. Cameron Brown, R-Fawn River Township, which should come as news to the 18 million people who voted for Hillary Clinton.

Of course Clinton has everything to do with McCain's impulsive, insulting choice that former McCain aide Mike Murphy trashed, sighing, "The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical." Evidently, Mighty Mac thinks we broads are so hard up to punch a ballot for someone with ovaries that we'll take just anyone, like spinsters over 40.

We're supposed to fall for a candidate who has to play up her eight years as the mayor of a town of 6,715 - where the Associated Press devastatingly remarked the "biggest civic worry is whether there will be enough snow for the Iditarod dog-mushing race" - and her time on the PTA to round out her resume.

Palin has spent almost two years in the governor's mansion. To put that in perspective, she leads the third least populated state with fewer folks than the 7th Congressional District.

No wonder she's elicited a collective groan from Alaska newspapers and many colleagues about her inexperience and incuriosity.

No matter. Her sculpted cheekbones and naughty high-heeled boots inspire a quivering Rush Limbaugh to declare her "a babe."

Point granted. But the simple fact is that if Palin were a bleeding-heart Democrat, there would be only two words to describe the nod: Affirmative Action.

It is a slap in the face to dedicated GOP Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, just to name a few. Palin's foreign policy credentials are so thin, having only traveled to three countries, that first lady-in-waiting Cindy McCain tried to pump her up by pointing out that Alaska is close to Russia.

Oh, dear Lord.

Yet somehow Republicans manage to tout Palin's massive "executive experience" with a straight face, while still blasting Barack Obama's eight years as a leader in the state Legislature in one of the biggest states in the country and almost four years in the U.S. Senate, chairman of a Foreign Relations subcommittee.

Oh, but don't even think of questioning St. Sarah's credentials. She is a Mom, as U.S. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph, noted in a statement - yes, with a capital "M." Um, OK, but does the GOP really want to play the parental fitness card when her 17-year-old is knocked up by a dude who looks like a bad boy reject from "The Hills"?

So if you dare ask about her ethics scandals, relationship with indicted U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens and readiness to be commander-in-chief on day one, be warned: You are Sexist. Even though when Hillary complained about her coverage in the primary, Sarah dismissed it as "whining."

It was a bewildered Palin who whimpered to CNBC a month ago, "I wish someone would tell me what the VP does."

But on Wednesday at the Republican National Convention, they replaced her with a new and improved Stepford Wife model to spew venom at that un-American Obama who looks down on the bitter folk.

Palin conveniently forgot to mention her extremist positions, like being anti-evolution, anti-abortion for victims of rape and incest and even against protecting polar bears from extinction. Maybe that's because most of us wouldn't view her as the mom down the street, but another out-of-touch fundamentalist windbag.

But what makes me saddest about this whole sorry affair is that it reveals an utter lack of judgment by McCain, whom I deeply admire. He calculated he needed to appease the base and try to capture the Clintonites by choosing someone he'd only interviewed once a few hours before offering her the job.

His entire campaign is built around us trusting him to do the right thing - even though most Americans disagree with him on most issues, from Iraq to the economy.

Sorry, John, I'm finding that hard to do these days.

So much for the safe choice

Let's pause for a minute amidst the scatty cacophony to John Edwards' affair with his flighty "videographer," who no reasonable person would pay to film paint dry.

There's an irony here that's been completely overlooked - and I don't mean the obvious one that the multimillionaire thought he could get away with schtupping the help and still become the Leader of the Free World in an age of 24/7 media.

No, it's the fact that the down-home son of a millworker with his lazy Carolinian drawl (and lily-white skin) was supposed to be the safe bet for the Democrats. Jaded liberals squawked that America would never go for the ballsy chick or the black dude, so you'll vote for Edwards and you'll like it.

That's the best we can hope for. America's just not ready and all that.

Of course, folks in Iowa didn't listen to the conventional wisdom and the rest is history. But even after Barack Obama secured the nomination, a pundit here or there would sourly mumble that he was floundering because of that black thing, needling that John Edwards would be blowing John McCain out of the water.

Which amounts to a nice theory for political science students to contemplate in between Jager bombs at the bar. Those of us in the real world rejected the Plastic One because we didn't know who he was (even after being a few thousand votes in Ohio away from the vice presidency in '04) and didn't trust him.

After observing and interviewing Edwards at political events since 2003, I can say that he was heavy on sheen and light on substance. He said all the right things, repeating Democratic talking points in his artful, aw-shucks way. The father of three was great at kissing babies.

But there was no way His Contrivance seemed ready to take that 3 a.m. phone call. (Although I would vote for him to play the president on tee-vee. His coif is killer).

So maybe that's why few of us were shocked at his revelations that yes, he actually did dally with Rielle Hunter, who still sports '80s Madonna hair as a nod to her days as a coked-out New York clubhopper.

John Edwards lie? Stop the presses.

In a truly classy move, the pretty boy heaved his party girl-cum-paramour under the bus ("I didn't love her") and stressed that he timed his infidelity between his wife's bouts with cancer, something the brilliant Maureen Dowd skewered as being "oncologically correct."

To think that Elizabeth Edwards (who Rielle sniffed "didn't give off good energy") will have to spend her last years shuddering from this humiliation is just vile. Monsieur Edwards claims he told his family, which presumably includes his eldest daughter, Cate, a Harvard law student. Maybe his other two kids, 8 and 10, can find out as a Christmas present later after Mommy's passed away.

Edwards, who nailed himself in an ABC interview as a narcissist, has cringingly insisted there's nothing more for anyone to say as "I've stripped myself bare." Well, there are questions of the paternity of Hunter's daughter and if this was the first time the senator strayed.

But that's just a measure on the hypocrisy scale. It's the political implications that I'm interested in.

Just think for a moment if he were the nominee. This would be game-over for the Dems. You can argue that McCain dumping his disfigured wife for an Anheuser heiress 18 years his junior would become an issue. Perhaps. But that was almost 30 years ago and all we see now is silver-maned Cindy, doting mother of seven.

We can have a robust debate whether extramarital affairs should have any place in political discourse. I vote no, but I'm a journalistic curmudgeon, in spite of my Gen X birthday and the fact that I'm paid to blog. But Edwards' tryst is out there (and how). Given the appalling scenario with his wife's metastatic cancer, I don't really feel like doing him any favors by ignoring the political fallout.

The reality is that this kind of salacious scandal is ruinous for politicians, especially when it reinforces the very doubts people had about the candidate in the first place. Edwards knows this, having watched Bill Clinton implode (and castigating him for it).

Which is another crisis likely averted by not picking Hillary as the nominee, besides the fact that she could unite the right in a way McCain never will. Who knows when Bill's next bimbo eruption would strike, not to mention his less sexy, but far more troubling dealings in Dubai. That's the real reason Clinton's not on Obama's veep short list, not bad blood after a bruising primary.

When it comes to arrogant politicians' penchant for extracurricular activities, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

And so a skinny black guy with big ears, a funny name (and the magazine-cover perfect family) is not only the voters' choice, but has turned out to be the Dems' safest bet for presidency.

Who would have thunk it.

Mighty Mac adrift in Michigan

Four years ago, a gaggle of grandmothers emerged from a University of Illinois building, breathlessly chirping about a U.S. Senate forum.

A cerise-scarfed lady spotted a placard for a hopeful and asked if he was The One.

"That's not our guy," she was told. "Our candidate is the one whose name no one can pronounce."

I recall glancing at her "Obama for Senate" button. Good luck, this hard-bitten political reporter thought before hurrying back to the library to finish researching an obscure local history project.

Five months later, I watched Barack Obama unfurl his fabled '04 Democratic National Convention speech in which he deftly defined the "hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too."

That was the first time I realized I'd underestimated Mr. Obama. Then came the Illinois senator's upset win in lily-white Iowa in January, 11 straight victories after Super Tuesday and knockout blow on the last primary night, June 3.

John McCain needs to learn that lesson - stat. The Vietnam POW clearly disdains Obama, a showboating whippersnapper out to steal his maverick mantle from under him. Pay your dues, kid, McCain practically seethes every time he spits out his name.

But there's another dynamic here - he clearly didn't want to face Obama. Lying below McCain's honey-coated praise for Hillary Clinton (and slams on the sexist press) was the stone-cold political calculation that she would shore up the right-wing base in a way he never could and be easier to vanquish.

Which is about right. Obama tops all the polls, even after Hillary bloodied him but good.

So one has to wonder if the Arizona senator was in denial about his inevitable opponent. Because what I want to know is: What was John McCain doing for the four months between when he clinched the GOP nomination and Obama sealed his?

And what's he doing now?

McCain had a tremendous advantage. And as far as I can see, he blew it - especially here in Michigan. It's a dream come true for a candidate to be able to define himself. To have the stage to yourself for months while your rival's teeth are being knocked in daily by a member of his own party is like a nonstop ecstasy trip for politicians.

Instead, McCain puttered around the county here and there and flipped burgers for Mitt Romney and other vice presidential wannabes in Sedona. His less than breakneck stump speed did little to evoke an image of gusto and vigor the 71-year-old needs to convey, especially to combat an oratorical Adonis who hasn't even broken a sweat after 18 straight months of barnstorming.

Since the Jan. 15 Michigan primary, McCain has done a couple of fundraisers and two events here, including a baffling May 7 speech on child pornography at Oakland University. On the list of top 1,000 issues for Michiganders, kiddie porn ranks about 1,263,000th.

The economy fills up slots one through 900 at least, as we've just hit 8.5 percent unemployment, a number we last saw when George W.'s daddy was in the Oval Office.

These are things the crackerjack Mitten State campaign team of Chuck Yob & Son should be telling McCain, but they're too busy hurling nukes at state GOP Chair Saul Anuzis to care. The Yob Doctrine dictates that it doesn't matter if you win or lose elections, but how many of your Republican brethren you can settle scores with by napalming them along the way.

McCain's campaign consists of two generic TV ads, as he seems utterly determined to lose Michigan at any cost. He won't even be back here until mid-July for yet another fundraiser.

In contrast, Obama, who completely ignored us for a year with our botched Democratic primary, has come back a-courtin' with a hundred red roses in hand on three different occasions in the last month.

"I'm so sorry, baby," the current Us Weekly cover boy croons to crowds, savvily hitting every sweet spot in the state from Troy to Grand Rapids. "I know the economy's been so bad. Let me make it up to you with John Edwards, Al Gore and $150 million in research pork."

As for the ground game, Obama is everywhere in the Great Lakes State, with 50 events last weekend from the U.P. to Downriver.

So there's little surprise that Mighty Mac sunk 8 points among independents in Rasmussen Michigan polls over the last month and he's trailing nationally, as well. He's flipped on offshore and arctic drilling and called last week's Supreme Court ruling upholding habeas corpus rights for Guantanamo detainees "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country."

How this crass pandering is supposed to snare Democrats and independents is beyond me.

Perhaps the strategy is to wait for Obama's star to combust over the Rev. Wright or some other ghastly gaffe. Phenoms can't last forever, after all. Slow and steady experience wins the race.

Which was pretty much what Nixon said about Kennedy in '60. And we all know how that turned out.

How Hillary failed feminism

For the first time in my life, I felt embarrassed to call myself a feminist.

I realized that as Hillary Clinton gave her narcissistic non-concession speech Tuesday, which should have marked the end of a historic campaign for women everywhere. But I want to send out my heartfelt thanks to her, Geraldine Ferraro, EMILY's List and New York NOW and Harriet Christian for doing what right-wing blowhards never could.

Lady Hillary sounded only slightly less sour and a smidge saner than dear Harriet, the Clinton supporter raving outside Saturday's Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting made instantly famous on YouTube.

"The Democrats are throwing the election away! And for what? An inadequate black male?" Christian cackled, adding on Fox News that "99 percent of blacks don't even know why they're voting for" Barack Obama.

That kind of racism, once jaw-dropping, is now par for the course for cutthroat Clintonistas.

Harriet was only one of a motley crew of bitter white women screaming that Obama was a "socialist" leading an "anti-woman cult." All the blind rage about "massive disenfranchisement" was over Clinton losing four whole delegates (two, since they were halved) from my state of Michigan.

I kid you not.

But it's easy to say sayonara to reality when your candidate has. Most days, Hillz lavishes more praise on John McCain that Obama, whom she again declared less qualified than herself after he clinched the nomination Tuesday. Not that she would gracefully concede, as she probably banished calculators, as well as TVs in the Baruch College bunker she holed herself up in.

How ironic is it for the wannabe feminist-in-chief to have adopted the persona of "Math is tough" Barbie?

Clinton seemed determined to string out her self-immolated campaign, make Obama sweat and ding him even more, until boatloads of her Capitol Hill colleagues told her to hit the road Wednesday. True to form, she was shocked, still expecting her loyal subjects to fuel a last-minute comeback, as is the Clinton birthright.

Hillary never could own up to her own failings in her campaign - the arrogance, absurdly bloated adviser salaries and lack of strategy after Super Tuesday. And she certainly could never acknowledge Baby Barack's strengths - superb organization, fundraising prowess and oratorical mastery.

No, it was sexism that got her in the end.

How is anyone buying this? Our heroine was the undisputed frontrunner as wife of a popular former two-term president who's run the party for 15 years, with a $109 million personal fortune to boot. The primary system was cannily crafted by cronies like the aptly monikered Harold Ickes to ensure a swift Clintonian coronation.

And when she started to lose, she viciously bludgeoned Obama, aided by surrogates like Gerry Ferraro whose race-baiting rhetoric resembled that of toothless Southern hicks in the Jim Crow era.

Perhaps even more disturbingly, Clinton's strategy came down to trying to nakedly engineer an Obama meltdown. She couldn't just pray for another Rev. Wright; she had to show all those "hardworking white Americans" the colossal error they were making to go with the Kenyan-Kansan (and mess with the queen).

So when she let fly her musing on Robert F. Kennedy's assassination, it was a telling glimpse into her Machiavellian psyche that seemed almost wistful, as though a bullet in Barack's brain was her only road to the White House.

It wasn't ideal, but she'd take it. Politics is a bloodsport, after all.

And somehow Obama, that "skinny black guy with big ears and a funny name," as he describes himself with the kind of self-deprecation Clinton is allergic to, defied all odds.

He went off script and beat her. Talk about historic.

As for Clinton, she mangled her moment in history. Feminism didn't fail her; she failed feminism.

The melodramatic hand-wringing ("Now we'll never have a woman president!") is ridiculous and an insult to talented female politicians across the country, many of whom pointedly backed Obama.

We will. It just won't be Hillary - not now.

Once upon a time, I counted Hillary Rodham Clinton a role model as a champion high school debater mulling law school. Having a first lady with a career was about three decades behind, I thought, never figuring out why she dropped the idea as quickly as her maiden name. In the end, I decided I hated money, hence my esteemed career as a writer.

And while I owe generations of women who came before me a debt of gratitude, I am profoundly tired of the identity politics wars that have decimated the left for a half-century. I am sophisticated enough to know the narrative of history is not gender (nor race); it is multifaceted and broad, terrible and triumphant.

If you don't get that, you don't get anything.

So when Clinton lauded herself Tuesday for launching a campaign that inspired parents to tell their daughters, "See, you can be anything you want to be," I tittered at her trademark vanity at first.

But she's right. May they grow up to be far more honorable leaders than she.

Obama checks McCain in Michigan

WARREN - John McCain left the door ajar in Michigan last week with a lackluster town hall - and Obama busted right through it with his own here on Wednesday.

Fresh off a walloping in West Virginia on Tuesday, Obama hit Macomb County to talk trade and jobs with those elusive Reagan Democrats. He'd obviously had a heart-to-heart with former U.S. Rep. David Bonior, the patron saint of organized labor who endorsed him last week and started a stampede of superdelegates.

By the end of the day, no one was mentioning the Mountain State and Michigan was on everyone's lips. It was a brilliant tactical move.

For the presumptive Democratic nominee, Macomb is the mother of all political symbols, crammed with blue-collar workers aloof to his charm and even hostile after the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scandal.

McCain blew his chance to shore up support in the Wolverine State on May 7 with a rambling speech on child pornography and human trafficking in Rochester Hills.

But Obama got that it's all about the economy, baby.

He ditched the soaring rhetoric, long speeches and stadium crowds for an invitation-only town hall meeting for 200 at Macomb Community College.

Obama obliterated Hillary Clinton's hokey critique that he's "all hat and no cattle," outlining detailed plans for jobs, energy, health care, manufacturing, trade agreements and education, like a $150 billion investment over 10 years in clean energy.

"People are anxious about the future and rightfully so," said Obama, his barely-blue sleeves symbolically rolled up.

He even gave a shout-out to Michigan's 21st Century Jobs Fund, saying we should "replicate that all across the country."

He won over folks like Dave Sahlaney, a 67-year-old shuttle driver who was just laid off from St. John Macomb-Oakland Hospital. The Warren grandfather of nine voted for Clinton in the primary and frankly says working-class and white voters have reservations about Obama. But he thinks the senator can win them over.

"He's a real straight-talker; he hits on issues that affect all Americans," Sahlaney said. "I'm disappointed he doesn't go personal with Hillary Clinton's attacks on him, but I respect him for it."

Then Obama capped it off with rock-star rally for 15,000 in Grand Rapids, where John Edwards, the highest-profile "hardworking white American" (as Clinton recklessly described her base) flashed his trademark toothy grin and endorsed him. Bonior's imprint was there again, as Edwards' former campaign manager.

"I felt guilty about not campaigning here," Obama grinned at the crowd, which started lining up more than 12 hours early. "... I decided that in my first full day in Michigan that I wouldn't be fooling around, the same old thing."

I couldn't help but think of Clinton mocking Obama's message of hope, back in February when people still took her and her campaign seriously.

"The sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing, and everyone will know we should do the right thing, and the world will be perfect," the empress brayed in a singsong tone.

And lo, that is indeed what appeared to happen to both Obama and Michigan this week.

It's ironic that Obama, whose name wasn't even on the ballot, is finally bringing a positive glow to the state, as opposed to the Democratic primary hatched by U.S. Sen. Carl Levin and National Committeewoman Debbie Dingell that only elicited ridicule. Maybe that's why Dingell appeared so dour in Warren, but it could just be because the state party's girl seems down for the count.

One thing is clear: If Obama wins Michigan after a yearlong absence, he'll have Bonior to thank.

Let's not forget that the frontrunner's last foray here was an admirable but combative speech at the Detroit Economic Club on the Big Three's obstinacy on fuel-economy standards. On Wednesday, Obama wisely pivoted, praising their strides in hybrids and vehicle quality while subtly slamming the Bush administration for throwing manufacturers to the wolves of the global economy.

Obama vowed to spend "every day in the White House fighting for you," ending his Warren speech on a note of humility: "I hope you guys will give me the chance."

His Michigan coming-out parties looked like Bonior checking Chuck Yob, McCain's co-chair who's consistently bungled operations here, starting with a 9-point primary loss. With the Democrats' mangled contest, the state was the GOP's to win, but Yob cares only about wooing the far right and West Michigan.

Obama, who sports the finest political operation since the Kennedys, didn't even bother sending three scraggly college kids to keep hope alive here. That was a big misstep, which will cost him some Mitten State delegates. All that changed last weekend with his drive to recruit 1 million volunteers, including an electric event in Detroit.

Bonior acknowledged Obama has ground to make up, but assured me "he'll be coming back on a regular basis." Smart man.

If it comes down to Bonior vs. Yob in Michigan, I'd bet the farm the state stays blue.

Where, oh where, will Hillary Clinton Democrats go?

The newest political trend story is hand-wringing over the so-called Hillary Democrats. Where will these poor ex-Reagan Democrats go in November?

Conventional wisdom says they can't go to Barack Obama, though no one seems eager to bring up race as the reason. Of course, Hillary herself said as much. Some polls have shown more than 30 percent will defect to John McCain.

Ooh, juicy. Only these polls are completely worthless at this stage of the game. After Michael Dukakis secured the 1988 Democratic nomination, polls showed him crushing George Bush The Elder. 'Nuf said.

As usual, the fight will be over independents and both Obama and McCain have their appeal. We'll see if McCain's love affair with Iraq or Rev. Jeremiah Wright hurt in the fall. For now, as the networks say on election night, it's too early to call.

One group worth talking about is the bitter white women who were the bedrock of Hillary's campaign - the ones who claim females who vote for Obama are anti-feminist ingrates and traitors. The ones who swear they'll never, ever vote for the guy who stole her job.

Three words, my sisters: Roe vs. Wade. You want John McCain to have control of your uterus? If you have any doubts, check out his speech this week on his judicial philosophy. Want more? He won't challenge the Republican Party platform, as he once advocated, to include exceptions to abortion for rape, incest and the mother's life.

Still anti-Obama, ladies? That's what I thought.

Susan J. Demas on "Off the Record"

"Off the Record," hosted by Senior Capitol Correspondent Tim Skubick, featured a panel Friday, May 2, of Susan J. Demas of MIRS, Bill Ballenger of Inside Michigan Politics, Kathy Barks Hoffman of the Associated Press and Rick Pluta of Michigan Radio.

The recall attempt of House Speaker Andy Dillon, Gov. Jennifer Granholm's emergency surgery, the Michigan Democratic delegate debacle and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy were debated.

To catch the show online:

Off the Record 5.2.08

Granholm adopts Clinton math, says MI key to her nomination

From my new Capitol Chronicles column and blog for mlive.com:

After Hillary Clinton's dual victories this week in Pennsylvania and at Michigan's district conventions, Gov. Jennifer Granholm said the Mitten State would be a key factor in her candidate winning the nomination.

"I think Michigan will be critical," said Granholm, Clinton's highest-profile supporter in the state.

On Saturday, Clinton won a quiet victory at the 15 Michigan Democratic Party (MDP) conventions, taking not just her allotted delegates but is likely to eventually gain a fair chunk of the uncommitted delegates the MDP officially said should go to Obama. Several labor members elected and uncommitted delegates reserved the right to vote for whomever their union endorses and most, especially the UAW, are thought to lean Clinton.

The rest of the 128 pledged delegates will be selected at the central committee meeting in May and Obama isn't expected to fare any better with the Clinton-friendly bunch.

Granholm was upbeat about Clinton's prospects for the nomination at a press conference about an overseas investment mission today.

"I think if you look at the popular vote, that's one aspect for the super delegates can consider in deciding who would be the strongest candidate in the general election," she said.

"If you look at all the citizens who have voted in the nation, she's got more votes by citizens," the governor added.

Granholm was on message. The Clinton campaign has been pushing the idea to the media, with some success, that after her 9-point win in Pennsylvania, she now leads in the popular vote. That includes Clinton's votes in Michigan and Florida, which she won, but the Democratic National Committee (DNC) stripped them of their delegates for holding early primaries.

The official tally is Barack Obama has 14,417,619 votes to Clinton's 13,917,393. With Florida and Michigan, it's 14,993,833 for Obama and 15,116,688 for Clinton.

What's most questionable about the Clinton camp's accounting is that Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan, although "uncommitted" was. The MDP officially said all uncommitted delegates should go to Obama. However, Clinton math doesn't give him any of the 238,168 "uncommitted" votes. Counting those, Obama bounces back in the lead, 15,232,001 to 15,116,688.

"Even if you gave him all the uncommitted, she would still be ahead in the popular vote," Granholm said.

When she was corrected by reporters, Granholm acknowledged, "I may be wrong," adding she was looking at RealClearPolitics.

When asked why Clinton should be allowed to claim votes she didn't campaign for, Granholm said, "She left her name on the ballot." Clinton did reassure New Hampshire voters last fall that the Michigan primary wouldn't count.

Granholm also blamed Obama for not consenting to a revote in Michigan, saying it wasn't fair to voters.

"And it's all nice to talk about the delegates and the super delegates and the party poobahs who are making decisions, but the people who actually voted and there was an effort to give people another chance to vote. Now is that fair?"

Interestingly, she cast Clinton as the champion of democracy and implied Obama was trying to win on procedural grounds. The roles have been flipped for most of the contest, as Obama does lead in delegates, states won and the popular vote and Clinton would have to win via super delegates or a convention fight. There's great consternation amongst Democrats, and not just Obama backers, that a Clinton win would subvert the democratic process.

Granholm said she didn't think the nomination would be decided until the last primaries on June 3.

The governor again called on the DNC to count Michigan's votes and seat the delegation. She said she did expect the delegation would be seated (Chair Howard Dean has committed to that, however vaguely) and thought the decision would come before the August national convention in Denver.

"Nobody wants to see a fight," Granholm said, flashing a grin at the media, "except for you all, probably."

Susan J. Demas on NBC, NPR, Newsweek, RealClearPolitics sites

My Michigan is becoming Clinton's secret weapon column in the Detroit News has sparked an interesting debate. It's being discussed and linked at:

Newsweek

NBC News First Read

National Public Radio News Blog

RealClearPolitics

Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish in The Atlantic

The Huffington Post

Daily Kos

My DD and in comments here

World and Global Politics

Outside the Beltway

Talking Points Memo and in comments here

Yahoo Buzz

U.S. Politics Today

Veracifier

LeftWord

Obama '08

The Clintonista Post

Election Bid 2008

Technorati

Newstin

Propeller

Expressio Unius

Memeorandum

Blogrunner

US Democrat

Richard's Blog the 411

RSS Micro

Marisacat

Michigan is becoming Clinton's secret weapon

Susan J. Demas
The Detroit News

If you punched your ballot for "uncommitted" in Michigan's Jan. 15 Democratic presidential primary to back Barack Obama, your vote might have essentially gone to Hillary Clinton anyway.

While all eyes were locked on Pennsylvania for the last six weeks, Clinton was quietly amassing delegates in the Wolverine State. And she was rewarded this past weekend with a significant victory at the district conventions.

This development naturally has been overshadowed by her big win Tuesday night in Pennsylvania. But the race for the Democratic nomination wasn't decided then and won't be by the remaining contests -- not North Carolina, Indiana or even Guam -- because the real fight is over delegates. And Michigan remains a key battleground.

On Aug. 25, Clinton will march into the national convention in Denver stronger than most people realize, thanks to her aggressive ground game in Michigan.

Buoyed by party elder support, Clinton seems likely to capture more than 60 percent of the state's 128 pledged delegates, according to an analysis by the Michigan Information & Research Service. Including the 28 superdelegates, which lean heavily in the New York senator's favor, she could win upward of 70 percent of delegates, provided that they're seated with full voting power.

That depends on the Democratic National Committee, which punished Michigan for leapfrogging the primary schedule. There is no deal yet to seat the delegation. But the Clinton camp is working overtime to ensure the elected slate is sent. Keep in mind that Clinton won 55 percent to uncommitted's 40 percent since Obama wasn't on the ballot. He has pushed for a 50-50 percent delegate split, but that proposal hasn't gained traction.

It's becoming apparent that Obama should have consented to a revote here. He certainly wouldn't have lost by 15 percentage points or more; polls have pegged the pair in a dead heat. But Obama seemed spooked that Clintonites put forth the plan and the money, so he quashed the do-over last month.

Now Obama is paying the price in delegates, starting with the Michigan Democratic Party's 15 district conventions on Saturday. The Clinton battle plan was flawlessly executed with an eye toward a contested convention. Their delegate roster is crammed with big names like former Gov. Jim Blanchard and Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero.

"We wanted to pick people who would be loyal to Hillary, who would commit to her through multiple ballots," Blanchard says.

Michiganders for Obama, a ragtag group of new volunteers, triumphed in turnout Saturday but were steamrolled by the Clinton machine. Obama has proved to be a master of organization, but he made a tactical error not to plump up his skeletal apparatus in Michigan.

As a result, he will almost certainly fall short of the 36 uncommitted delegates selected. Volunteers argued that only Obama supporters should be uncommitted delegates, but they were outmaneuvered. About half of the uncommitted delegates reserved the right to vote for Clinton, depending on whom their unions eventually endorse.

While union officials flatly deny they're in the tank for Clinton, Obama supporters point out that United Auto Workers Legislative Coordinator Nadine Nosal was elected in the 8th District as an alternate Clinton delegate. That underscores the fact that Obama's speech to the Detroit Economic Club last year, calling for higher federal fuel economy standards, went over with labor leaders like a lead balloon.

In May, the party's labor-heavy, Clinton-friendly central committee chooses the remaining 45 delegates, setting up a scenario of more uncommitted delegates switching to Clinton.

Given her narrow path to the nomination, Clinton and her aides have argued that pledged delegates are fair game to flip. Although they've since backed away from such statements, the Michigan delegate conventions show the Clinton delegate strategy is being set into motion. What this could mean is four very interesting days in Denver. Although the odds still favor Obama -- who leads in delegates, the popular vote and states won -- he has to be a bit rattled over two losses in one week.

If Clinton comes out on top in a floor war, we might well look back at the Michigan mêlée as the turning point.

Did Clinton Forces Infiltrate "Uncommitted" Delegates at Michigan Dem Convention?

by Susan J. Demas

Buzzflash Guest Contribution

If you voted "uncommitted" in the Michigan primary to support Barack Obama, your vote might have essentially gone to Hillary Clinton anyway.

The Michigan Information & Research Service (MIRS) has learned that some of the 36 uncommitted delegates chosen at Saturday's district conventions say they're staying uncommitted and not backing Obama. That seems curious, because there are only two candidates left in the race and those backing Clinton could have caucused for her.

Michigan Democratic Party (MDP) Chair Mark Brewer gave those exact instructions to those attending the 15 sites. But Obama supporters say they might not have been heeded to give Clinton even more than the 55 percent of delegates she won on January 15.

This could be a harbinger of what is to come. A MIRS analysis of superdelegates shows most favor Clinton (See "Advantage Clinton In MI Super Delegate Hunt," 3/19/08). The central committee will choose another 45 pledged delegates, and party elders are largely pro-Hillary. When all is said and done, Clinton likely will walk away with more than 60 percent of Michigan's pledged and superdelegates, perhaps more than 70 percent.

That is if the delegates are seated with full voting power. Negotiations are still ongoing with the Democratic National Committee, although it's not clear what the makeup would be. Obama has proposed splitting them 50-50. So there's a chance more chaos could ensue down the road, although MDP spokeswoman Liz Kerr said they'll cross that bridge when it comes.

Clinton, by and large, had the establishment on Saturday. Former Governor Jim Blanchard, who didn't attend the 9th District, but was elected a delegate, said the Clinton forces were well organized with an eye toward a contested convention. "We wanted to pick people who would be loyal to Hillary, who would commit to her through multiple ballots," said Blanchard.

There was Michiganders for Obama, an upstart group trying to organize but it was behind the curve since the candidate never campaigned here.

Some Obama supporters were especially suspicious on Saturday of the "unity slates" made up of members of the UAW, which hasn't endorsed a candidate. Attendees said there were shouting matches and massive confusion at the 9th District convention. UAW member Catherine Martin was elected as an uncommitted delegate and plans to stay that way until the union endorses.

State Rep. Aldo Vagnozzi (D-Farmington Hills), an elected Obama delegate, points out Martin was elected by an "overwhelmingly Obama crowd."

The problem is the perception that the UAW backs Clinton. Nadine Nosal, legislative coordinator for the UAW, was elected in the 8th District as an alternate delegate supporting Clinton.

The UAW flatly denies it's pro-Clinton. Nosal said the union put delegate candidates in both caucuses because it's neutral. As for the Obama supporters' criticism, she said, "I don't perceive it to be what they're saying."

The Clinton campaign has been unusually quiet about the Michigan conventions. Clinton and national advisers have said that Obama's pledged delegates are fair game to flip, although they've backed away from statements afterward. Still, Clinton is making an aggressive behind-the-scenes push with superdelegates and to massage the nominating process to ensure she gets the nomination, even if she's behind in the delegate count, popular vote, and states won.

The MDP hasn't released an official list of the 83 delegates and 15 alternates. Kerr said it hasn't been policy to do so in past years until a few days before the national convention.

The remaining 45 of the 128 pledged delegates will be selected at the central committee meeting in May.

Derrick Johnson is an uncommitted delegate from the 15th District who supports Obama and also is head of the Washtenaw County Board of Elections. He said he's heard from Obama backers in other districts who were concerned they were outmaneuvered by Clinton supporters.

"If you're uncommitted, our message is that you shouldn't be uncommitted now. There are only two people left. If you support Clinton, there's a process for her delegates. Uncommitted should be for Obama," Johnson said. "It wasn't a problem in our district, but I think we had a different culture there than in some others."

Vagnozzi said there were four times as many Obama supporters than Clinton backers in the 9th, which seems to fit the statewide pattern. But the MDP doesn't have attendance numbers yet.

When asked if that was surprising, given the fact that Clinton won the primary, Vagnozzi said, "I think it shows the election wasn't an accurate reflection. Obama wasn't on the ballot. Clinton was."

He said the most important thing is for the delegation to be seated, because a Democrat will never win the White House without Florida and Michigan.

Vagnozzi acknowledges that scenario doesn't favor Obama.

"It might, but it's much more important to seat Michigan than any downside to it."

Nosal said it was her "hope and prayer" that the Democrats rally around the nominee whenever that's decided. "We need to come together. We need to elect a Democrat -- I feel so strongly about that. Otherwise, we'll have four more years of what we've already had eight years of."

Bitter white women cling to Clinton

As soon as crackly audio of Barack Obama’s comments about “bitter” rural dwellers surfaced, the histrionics began.

Hillary Clinton, John McCain and the pundit class declared this was It – the defining moment of the campaign, that would seal Obama’s fate as a macchiato-sipping McGovernik destined to be a footnote as that black guy who adorably thought he could run he free world.

But most polls in Pennsylvania haven’t budged and Obama maintains a comfortable lead nationally. More of those rural voters gave him money than Clinton.

So what if a candidate stumbled and no one cared? Why, the talking heads and seething rivals would keep wailing on it until people did.

So much for the media being in the tank for Obama.

Under our modern rules of simplistic, soap opera-style politics, Obama should be a goner. This campaign has been an endless parade of stupid statements, often by surrogates, typically followed by feigned outrage and resignations. Sideshow antics are deemed critical turning points, from Hillary the “monster” to Rev. Jeremiah Wright to anything that froths from Bill Clinton’s yap.

Lady Hillary’s entire raison d’être for staying in a mathematically impossible race is to goad Obama into saying something that finally convinces the unwashed masses (and superdelegates) he’s unelectable.

Obama must be taught a lesson, Senator Schoolmarm insists. You just can’t say this in politics:

“But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them.

“And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

“So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Shame on you, Barack Obama. Shame on you for that ghastly gaffe (which the brilliant Michael Kinsley defines as when a politician tells the truth).

Spend a day in the rural 7th Congressional District and tell me Obama isn’t dead on. That’s the reason a smooth-talking preacher like Republican Tim Walberg beats an effective congressman with the promise to round up illegals and rescue fetuses from slaughter. That was more important to dowtrodden voters two years ago than Joe Schwarz busting his hump to secure $10 million to expand I-94 or save hundreds of jobs at the Battle Creek Air National Guard Base.

McCain and Clinton are still piling on. There’s something mildly amusing about two long-time multimillionaires blasting the guy who grew up on food stamps as a shameful snob.

It’s unfortunate politicking by McCain, who in January admirably told Michiganders the truth that auto jobs weren’t coming back.

But Clinton’s jabs are fiercer, since she desperately needs “Bittergate” to be the death blow for Obama. Now Hilly’s got a gun and recently recovered memories about hunting ducks with Gramps (let’s hope these hold up better than sniper fire at Tuzla). She’ll reign over us with the sunny optimism that’s marked her indignant, calcified campaign.

Too bad she once slammed southern working-class whites this way: “Screw ‘em.”

The year was 1995. Newt Gingrich’s Republican revolution had engulfed the nation as a backlash to Clintonism. Angry white men were everywhere, railing against their witchy wives and black guys taking their jobs. And Hillary was incensed by their betrayal.

But there’s an eerie parallel with the bitter white women who are the bedrock of Clinton’s campaign today.

Their narrative (just ask Gerry Ferraro) is a page out of the angry white male handbook: Baby Barack is an affirmative action hire out to snatch the job out from under the vastly experienced Clinton. Missing from this (racist) feminist parable is the obvious fact that our heroine’s résumé is only worth considering because she has her husband’s last name (ooh, gutsy move, Mrs. C.) and claims his time in the White House as her own, a truly ballsy move.

“It’s her time!” the Clintonistas whine.

So when I heard about their “I’m Not Bitter” bumper stickers, I almost spit out my Merlot, elitist that I am.

Look, their girl used to be young and idealistic like Obama, but she learned, thanks to that vast right-wing conspiracy, that getting down and dirty was the only way to win. The new face of Girl Power looks a lot like Machiavelli: The ends justify the means, baby.

So if Obama glides to the nomination on that unbelievably naïve “Hope” campaign, it’s just not fair.

Which is what almost certainly will happen, gaffes be damned. The Clintonian kitchen sink strategy is crumbling.

And that’s a truly bitter pill to swallow.

Susan J. Demas featured in the Guardian U.K., Forbes

Korea trade deal an issue in Michigan election

From The Guardian U.K. and Forbes
By Soyoung Kim

DETROIT, April 17 (Reuters) - Deepening woes in the U.S. auto industry have raised concerns about a free trade pact with South Korea, and analysts say it could sway Michigan voters when they cast their presidential ballots.

The pact, signed last year and awaiting legislative approval in both nations, is viewed by many as punishing an industry already in the middle of a wrenching restructuring.

Democratic hopefuls Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have seized on the backlash and made their opposition to the deal their top selling point in Michigan. But presumptive Republican nominee John McCain has endorsed it.

The Democrats' strategy has a good chance of paying off in a race that is likely to be tight, political analysts say.

"There is certainly a backlash against trade agreements with nations like South Korea in Michigan, which has seen thousands of jobs shipped overseas," said Susan Demas, an analyst at Michigan Information & Reserve Service in Lansing.

"Obama and Clinton definitely have the upper hand in Michigan on trade," she said.

From 2000-2005, Michigan, home to General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler, lost 42 percent of its auto assembly jobs, versus a 14 percent loss in the rest of the nation, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

Rising imports and more production in southern U.S. states by Asian rivals such as Hyundai Motor have helped make Michigan's unemployment rate -- at 7.2 percent -- the highest in the nation.

LIFTING TARIFF, ENDING TAXES

The trade agreement calls for the immediate elimination of South Korea's 8-percent tariff on U.S. vehicles and the U.S. removal of its 2.5-percent tariff.

It would also remove South Korea's system that levies taxes based on engine size, a disadvantage to larger U.S.-made autos. It also has a clause that if South Korea violates the promises, U.S. tariffs on South Korean cars, which topped about $220 million in 2006, would snap back into place.

But Detroit is more concerned about South Korean autos and parts flowing in than about gaining market share in Korea. Less than 4 percent of cars sold in South Korea are imports, the lowest market share for imported autos of any industrialized country.

"It's various nontariff barriers that change the game to make it difficult for foreign automakers to compete, not the 8 percent tariff," said Stephen Collins, president of the Auto Trade Policy Council which represents Detroit carmakers.

SHADOW OVER RATIFICATION

South Korean president Lee Myung-bak, who is in the United States this week in his first official visit to the country, pledged a swift ratification of the pact in an investor forum in New York on Wednesday.

Expectations are growing that South Korea will soon take a step to fully opening its market to U.S. beef, which U.S. lawmakers say is a prerequisite for the auto pact to be ratified in Congress.

But concerns that the annual $11 billion loss in automotive trade with South Korea will only widen, along with the beef feud, are casting a shadow over speedy resolution.

Ron Gettelfinger, head of the United Auto Workers, attacked the Bush administration for backing the South Korea deal.

"We don't value our industry as a nation compared to other nations," Gettelfinger told a forum in Canton, Michigan, this month. "South Korea exported 700,000 vehicles to the United States. The United States exported 7,000 vehicles to South Korea."

U.S. auto employment peaked at 1.1 million in 1999 but has since fallen by 27 percent, according to Automotive Research. The center estimates employment by Detroit's Big Three will fall another 15 percent by 2016 from about 241,000 at the end of last year.

UNION CLOUT

The UAW has yet to endorse a Democratic candidate. Once it does, it will make a substantial difference in a state that has voted for a Democrat in every presidential election since 1992 but now appears to lean toward McCain, said Phil Power, head of the Center for Michigan, an Ann Arbor-based think tank.

"I've seen recent polls suggest Senator McCain is ahead. I think part of that is caused by the fact there's no Democratic nominee at this point and that the Michigan primary election was so confused and messed up that Michigan voters are not very happy about the Democratic Party right now," Power said.

The national party invalidated the Democratic nominating contests in Michigan and Florida in January because the states violated party rules. The states were denied delegates to the August party convention that picks the nominee.

The sad, short political life of John Edwards

John Edwards stood before me, cradling an angelic 11-month-old popping a pacifier with the serenity only a father of four has.

His now famously $400-coiffed hair was shaggier then, his powder-blue Oxford collar unbuttoned and his cauliflower eyes less crinkled. There was an ease to the then-freshman senator on that sultry August day in 2003.

Speaking to a gathering of 40 university-types in a sprawling Iowa City backyard, Edwards relished his sunny, upstart campaign, much like Mike Huckabee did this time around.

The expert litigator didn't unfurl a fiery speech, as would become his trademark in 2008, nor did he spend much time on labor issues, save for his "son of a millworker" spiel. He deftly touched on the death of his oldest son, Wade, which propelled him into politics.

But in spite of his paper-thin political résumé (far skimpier than Barack Obama's), he looked presidential in a Hollywood sort of way. And he definitely had the kissing babies part down.

So I wasn't particularly surprised that he scored second place in the Iowa caucuses in '04. Nor was I by his repeat performance this year.

The difference was, after moving to the cornfields for a couple years, coming in No. 2 again was the death-knell of his campaign. I had my suspicions even back in August 2007 after talking with Edwards strategist Joe Trippi.

In the spin room after a Chicago debate, Trippi refreshingly didn't fall over himself to invent all the ways his guy won. He wisely said the field was winnowing to three, lumping Edwards and Obama together as the reform candidates.

When I asked if Edwards would hold a fundraising and organizational advantage over Republicans, Trippi replied, "Whoever the Democratic nominee is - whether it's Edwards or someone else - will inherit a much better operation."

When your communications guru stops painting you as an invincible superhero, you've got problems. Even Dennis Kucinich kept hope alive by adorably telling audiences, "When I'm president . . ."

There was a surrealist melancholy to Edwards' second run, as his wife, Elizabeth, wilted from a recurrence of incurable breast cancer. Both of them seemed itching for a fight - and who could blame them?

But for a former political Pollyanna, Edwards' newfound anger seemed off-key and his love affair with unions (after previously sitting on his hands in right-to-work North Carolina) came off contrived.

His worst moment came at that Chi-town debate, when a disabled steelworker who could barely stand at the microphone pled with candidates about universal health care.

"What's wrong with America?" Steve Skvara asked, neck pulsating in pain. "And what will you do to change it?"

Edwards blithely dispensed vague promises of reform, before proclaiming himself to be the true workers' candidate.

"Who was with you in crunch time?" Edwards grinned ingratiatingly at the crowd.

It was a truly chilling exchange, which his campaign didn't get, instead trumpeting the footage on YouTube. I wondered how a man whose wife has metastatic stage four cancer could respond that way.

After a string of dismal showings before Super Tuesday, Edwards quit. He never captured the limelight he felt he'd earned as a former vice presidential nominee, usurped by Hillary Clinton primping herself for coronation and by the superstar status of the silver-tongued Obama.

("We can't make John black; we can't make him a woman," Elizabeth Edwards had once scowled on the stump).

As the increasingly bitter Democratic brawl drags on, attention is turning to party elders to inject some sanity. But although a steady drip of superdelegates have come Obama's way, Edwards has stayed mum.

The conventional wisdom was that Edwards would endorse the frontrunner. They'd both ganged up on Clinton as the corporate candidate, who defended taking boatloads of lobbyists' cash because they "represent real Americans."

The golden boy hasn't and is now said to favor Clinton, whom he respects as a fighter, underscoring his resentment of Obama's successful healer-in-chief campaign.

The Edwardses are, not surprisingly, passionate about health care and prefer Clinton's blueprint to Obama's. This has always been a bizarre argument amongst the Dems, who all sport strikingly similar plans that are miles from John McCain's and the status quo.

There's a legitimate debate to be had over mandates (Obama doesn't have one for adults) but it's really just academic. Plans are just a starting point for negotiating with Congress (which Clinton blew big-time in 1993).

Four years after that Iowa City garden party, I'm still not quite sure who John Edwards is.

What is it that he wants? Does he want attorney general, terrorizing Wall Street a la Eliot Spitzer (sans the hooker mess)? It seems doubtful that he covets a second crack at veep. And he seems too restless to settle back down at the admirable anti-poverty organization he founded.

I don't think he knows.

He appears to be a man adrift in the face of losing his rock of 30 years. Grief and ambition drove him into politics. Sadly, it's now become a circular quest.

Susan J. Demas on "Off the Record"

"Off the Record," hosted by Senior Capitol Correspondent Tim Skubick, featured a panel Friday, March 21, of Susan J. Demas of MIRS, Bill Ballenger of Inside Michigan Politics, Kathy Barks Hoffman of the Associated Press and Dawson Bell of the Detroit Free Press.

The aborted Michigan Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton's Detroit visit, Bill Schuette's career options and the Blue Cross/Blue Shield bills were debated.

To catch the show online:

Off the Record 3.21.08

Clinton stacks the deck for re-vote

“Saturday Night Live” is clearly in the tank for Hillary Clinton, but here’s what you might not know: so is the Michigan Democratic establishment.

That’s the disingenuous backdrop to the frenzied debate over a do-over primary in the Great Lakes State after Clinton’s comeback last week.

She’s locked up Gov. Jennifer Granholm, former Gov. Jim Blanchard and Sen. Debbie Stabenow. And let’s not forget House Energy Chair John “The Truck” Dingell, whose wife, Democratic National Committeewoman Debbie Dingell, (not coincidentally) engineered the botched Jan. 15 primary to be Clinton’s firewall.

So much for that.

There’s also Michigan Democratic Party (MDP) Chair Mark Brewer, who swears on a stack of Bibles that he’s neutral. But everyone knows he was a big fan of fellow labor guy John Edwards and jumped to Clinton after he dropped out.

Who’s in Barack Obama’s camp? Rep. John Conyers, Teamster President James Hoffa and a smattering of state legislators, which means the Clintonistas hold most of the cards in the battle over a re-vote.

By now, the world knows Michigan’s primary was a bad joke straight out of SNL. Unlike Florida, Clinton was the only major candidate on the ballot; Obama and Edwards yanked their names off as soon as the Democratic National Committee erased the state’s delegates for brazenly flouting party rules.

Last fall, even Clinton called the contest meaningless.

She only mustered 55 percent against no one (a.k.a. “uncommitted”) in the race for zero delegates, which Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell cleverly spun on Sunday’s “Meet the Press”: “You run against uncommitted, that’s the toughest election to win.”

Yeah, right.

As it stands, Obama has stingily hung on to his 100-plus delegate lead, even with Texas (which he won anyway in delegates) and Ohio.

That means the Clinton camp needs to reset the electoral math equation to win. And voila! Michigan and Florida have reemerged as the battleground.

Problem is, Clinton still can’t catch up unless Obama nets zero delegates in some contests. Enter Blanchard, who proposes “all-or-nothing” primaries in the two states in a last-ditch attempt to give a Clinton nomination electoral legitimacy.

If you don’t like the rules, change ‘em. Worked for the Soviet Union.

Granholm has been less blatant, casting an eye to the federal bench or a cabinet post with either candidate, though her heart belongs to Hillary. (When Obama was on a winning streak, the gov notably was one of the first to glom onto the “dream ticket” scenario).

So Granholm’s thrown out the idea of a “firehouse primary,” a scaled-back contest on a Saturday.

Of course, it’s still murky how the Mitten State – which just hiked taxes to plug a $2 billion deficit – can afford another primary after shelling out $10 million for a worthless one in January.

One solution you’re not hearing about is a less-costly caucus – which the state party has traditionally held in presidential years. But caucuses have favored Obama’s hustle and organization, and thus have been deemed “undemocratic” by Team Clinton.

That surely will come as news to first-in-the-nation Iowa.

Sen. Carl Levin, who doesn’t have a dog in this fight and thus has moral standing, backs a mail-in re-vote. Sounds sensible, especially from a cost perspective, but there’s no way to snuff out the stench of becoming a banana republic.

The truth is, there aren’t any great solutions here.

But Brewer wants his delegates – he’s staked his reputation on this fight. The staunch Granholm ally is negotiating furiously, insisting the outcome will be fair to Obama, since the MDP, DNC and both campaigns all have to sign on.

Many Obama backers would leap at the chance to vote for him for the first time. But Brewer’s promises ring flat - kind of how the Arab world scoffs at the idea of the United States as an honest broker in the Middle East peace process.

Let’s be clear - nobody is pure in this. The Obamaniacs want their guy to win and some are willing bend the rules accordingly. State Sen. Buzz Thomas, D-Detroit, for instance, wants to split Michigan’s delegates 50-50.

The difference is, he’s in absolutely no position to make that happen. The Clinton cabal has stacked the deck.

What they don’t realize is ultimately, their strategy is a house of cards.

The most ominous sign for Clinton is her crushing defeat in Detroit, where uncommitted pulled 70 percent of the vote. Our biggest city – which is economically decimated and 82 percent black – already feels disenfranchised.

Clinton could irreparably alienate the party’s most dependable voting block - and racially explosive remarks by supporters like Geraldine Ferraro don’t help.

After all, how does a Democratic presidential hopeful ever carry Michigan? Stockpile big margins in Detroit to offset outstate returns.

Yep, Hillary can win this hand. But I’ll bet she still loses in the end.