Chess: A Non-Violent Campaign

QUEENBEEH, a commentor over at Jack and Jill Politics, said:

Obama realized from the beginning that the rules state that the winner has to “win” a set number of delegates to claim the nomination. The rules don’t specify which states these delegates need to come from or whether any state or commonwealth’s delegates carry any more or less weight than the others. The contest is for delegates. Obama has contested for delegates while the billary camp focused on primary wins and only realized after her defeats in Iowa and South Carolina that she was in trouble with the delegate count. This is why she is trying to reframe victory as winning big states as opposed to the original rule of winning the nomination by delegate count. As we have seen with our own eyes, the clintonistas don’t play by the rules and their Mafioso tactics are doing irrevocable damage to the party. They are trying to bully the party and the electorate into making billary the nominee.

She can win every contest from now on, which she won’t, and still not overtake Obama in the criteria of winning most delegates that was set by the Democratic Party. If the party reverses its own rules and throws the contest to billary, then Obama supporters will walk away from Denver and the party, virtually assuring a win by Grandpa.

I have read many blogs about the disappointment with Obama’s losses in Ohio and Texas. Well he won Texas just like Nevada. Ohio was never going to be a win for him given billary’s support by the state party machine. The rule counts delegates won as victory. He was 20 points behind and still won the all important delegate count. We are all distracted by the media hype and spin of primary victories as the ultimate criteria for winning. This is a campaign unlike any ever seen. Obama’s is a stealth campaign for delegates while billary follows the old model of ignoring Iowa, winning New Hampshire and South Carolina (which she lost big time) followed by a big win on Super Tuesday to finish her opponent. Because of his concentration on delegates, he virtually nullified her win in California by picking up some mid-western states. Obama’s playing chess and she’s playing checkers.

As in chess billary is relying on her Bishops (Governors, Mayors and elected officials’ party machines) to steer primary wins her way. She has lost some of her pawns (black voter, youth voters, and more educated voters) but holds on to other pawns (blue collar workers, women, and Hispanics). Her castles (super delegates) have only two moves, follow your constituents or be loyal to the candidate. Right now Obama has her in check (most delegates won, leading in popular vote, and most states won). If he keeps rolling up the delegate count, raising more money, and moving super delegates his way, he can call check mate.

He is also running a non-violent campaign against old style politics. Many of us want him to “do something” to show that he’s a fighter. Would anyone today say that Martin Luther King was not a fighter? We are so accustomed to dirty politics and anything goes that we accept it as the norm. He is trying to show us another way to do business. We have to be like those young people that sat down at the lunch counter. We have to steadfastly believe in his method of a non-violent campaign and act accordingly.