LANSING -- Imagine this scenario: Rudy Giuliani emerges from the long series of Republican primary struggles with more delegates than anyone else -- but not a majority.
Mitt Romney is second, but unease over his Mormonism has prevented him from closing the sale with Christian conservatives. A late resurgence has given John McCain a few western victories and just enough delegates to make a difference. For the first time since 1952, a national convention starts without any clear nominee.
That would mean wheeling, dealing and horse-trading and some of the most exciting politics in decades. The same scenario might as easily happen on the Democratic side.
And in both cases, when the fireworks started, Michigan would be completely shut out of the action, their 178 Democratic and 61 Republican delegates disenfranchised.
Why?
Simply because Michigan seems poised to violate the rules of both major parties and move its primary up to Jan. 15, ahead of both the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries, which have a sort of quasi-holy "first in the nation" status. The Democratic National Committee harshly penalized Florida recently, taking all its convention delegates away for moving its primary to Jan. 29.
Similar action against Michigan is expected to follow, and late last week, the National Republican Party indicated it intended to do much the same. That was blithely dismissed by Saul Anuzis, the state GOP chair. "My expectation is that in the end, all of the delegates will be seated," he said. "The party is going to want to be united."
Maybe so, maybe not. What is clear is that moving Michigan's primary won't really affect Iowa and New Hampshire's bellwether status. Officials in those states indicate they'll move their primaries into December if they have to, compounding the absurdity.
What is going on is not a reflection of Michigan so much as the breakdown of the traditional process for selecting presidential nominees. Not so long ago, the process didn't really get under way until late February or early March. Then, Iowa and New Hampshire kicked off a stately procession of primaries and caucuses.
California capped it all with a primary the first week of June. This year, however, the whole process is likely to be over after Feb. 5, when nearly half the states will vote in what is being called "Super-Duper Tuesday."
Michigan had a primary on the books scheduled for Feb. 26, which now seems likely to be about as irrelevant as Ohio's March 4 primary. For while a brokered convention is entirely possible -- this year especially -- over the last half-century, the usual pattern has been for one candidate to do well and rack up the nomination early.
For years, U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., has been irked that his state didn't have a bigger role in the nominating process. This year, after months of behind-the-scenes negotiations, the state parties agreed to do something about it and jump-start the process.
Republicans are enthusiastic about the date. Democrats are less united. The party has, in fact, been ignoring the primary and using a caucus system to select convention delegates since 1992.
This year, supporters of former U.S. Sen. John Edwards would prefer a caucus, because they think their man might do better in a forum like that, where the influence of labor is magnified.
One Edwards supporter, U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Menominee, adds that he doesn't think the cash-strapped state can afford to shell out the millions a primary would require.
Yet the Legislature and governor appear set to go for broke, hold a statewide primary more than seven months before the national convention and hope their delegates get seated.
One wonders if Ohio might not have the last laugh if the early primaries should be inconclusive. That's unlikely.
The late Arizona congressman Mo Udall, one of the few politicians with a wicked sense of humor, once said that presidential politics was like a football game in which "once someone scores first, they thereafter only need two yards for a first down."
What also happens is that the flow of campaign cash accelerates for the winners and tails off fast for the losers, which is the same thing. What isn't clear is where the absurdity of jump-starting the process by holding primaries earlier and earlier will end.
But consider: Next year, the process in Michigan is likely to be over three weeks after Christmas, before many harried voters are even paying attention. Primary voters may well have to brave blizzards to reach the polls, especially in the Upper Peninsula.
Most of the rest of the nation will register their choice not long after that. And if any new information surfaces that would give voters buyer's remorse over the next half-year before the convention, well, too bad. It seems like we might need a better way.
Contact Jack Lessenberry at Bucca@aol.com or write to him at 189 Manoogian Hall, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48202.
Print this story
E-mail this story
