More Dog on Politics

Dog and I were sitting at the dinner table with the kids last night (OK, I was sitting AT the table and Dog was UNDER the table, begging for roast beef scraps) and we decided to have a conversation about something more culturally significant than 3rd grade math test races or middle school friendship dramas.

“Let’s talk about the election!” I said and Dog wagged his tail furiously in agreement (or maybe just his optimistic, “cute-dog” begging strategy…)

“So, children,” I said in my best pseudo-intellectual, self-satisfied, politically-conscious, good-mom voice, “What do you think is the most important quality in selecting a president?”

“Getting the most votes!” said Savannah, my literal-minded, analytical child.

“Yes, of course. That’s obvious,” I responded, thinking to myself that this obvious strategy didn’t work out so well for Gore in 2000.

“Let me phrase it differently. What quality is most important to YOU in a candidate who YOU would vote for?”

“Honesty,” was Savannah’s immediate answer. “And being frank with the voters. But I guess that’s kind of the same thing.” I think Savannah may have perhaps been influenced a teeny, tiny bit by plucking “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them” by Al Franken off of my bookshelf.

“How about you, Carson?”

“Honesty,” says my second-born who adores and emulates his sister. And then his wise-cracking evil twin added, “And puppy-pink nail polish for the girls!”

“What if Obama wore puppy-pink nail polish?” asked Savannah in her hard-hitting, Mike Wallace-in-training style. “Would you vote for him?”

“Yes!” And then Carson added, “Just kidding!”

But sometimes I wonder if the election might come down to such frivolous issues. I wonder if some candidates might just be desperate enough to don puppy-pink nail polish or some other similarly ridiculous issue position or media ploy in the hopes to gain a few votes that would tip them over the top.

I tried to explain the concept of state primaries and delegates and conventions and the parts that they play in who we, as a country, decide who will run for president.

I was surprised that my children had not learned any of this in their very fine public schools, and then, I was even more surprised that I, the political junkie that I am, could not answer many of the questions about how we nominate presidential candidates, especially when it came to numbers.

Then I did something that is a definite No-No in terms in family dinner etiquette—I brought out my laptop for some dinner-time Googling.

And here, with the requisite disclaimers about the unreliability of info found on the Internet, are some interesting things we learned about how we nominate Democrats and Republicans for president:

• Democrats and Republicans both determine their nominees by who wins the majority of delegates from the various state primaries and caucuses.
• The rough numbers are about 2,000 for the Democrats and about 1,000 for the Republicans.
• About 40% of the Democratic delegates are “super-delegates” who are not bound by voters. These super-delegates include Democratic governors and members of Congress, and former democratic elected officials, like Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Al Gore. Which essentially means that, for the Democrats, winning the popular vote is important, but, in the case of a fractured party, as may very well be the case this year, the old Boys network is even more important.

This could be the most interesting primary election season in memory. The Republicans are all over the place. They could go into the convention with no real winner. They would have to fight it out at the convention. That would be fun for Dog to watch.

With the Democrats, the question is, who is more of an Old Boy? Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama?

Unlike me, Dog is a one issue voter. Dog’s vote is with whoever is offering roast beef.