Mocking the SUPER SERIOUS DNC Rules Committee

This is not the diary you should get all the facts from folks.  Enjoy!!"

There's more...

2008 DNC Delegate Selection Rules (FL & MI info)

2008 DNC Delegate Selection Rules

2008delegateselectionrules.pdf 008delegateselectionrules.pdf


Rule 11.A (page 12 of the document; page 16 pdf)
Rule 20.C.1.a (page 20 of the document, page 24 of pdf)
Rule 20.C.1.b (page 20 of the document, page 24 of pdf)
Rule 9 (page 10 of the document, page 14 of pdf)

Based upon the rules as I read them ---

All the pledged delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated according to the certified primary votes.  This however should include the undecided pledged delegates from Michigan being seated as undecided, and the pledged delegates for Obama in Florida being stripped for his campaign's violation of the no campaigning agreement, provided the committee agrees that such violation occurred and was material.  The pledged delegates should only receive half a vote as further sanction for the states' violation of the primary calendar rules (the delegate issue not being resolved until this committee's decision has also been a punishment to these states and to the candidates campaigns' momentum).  All super delegates should be seated and receive a full vote (apparently they are differently designated than the pledged and un-pledged delegates although this remains somewhat unclear).  The other states, which also violated the calendar rules, should receive a written warning which indicates that in the future one state's violation of the rules will not absolve another state's similar reactionary violation.  Any popular vote argument could be made based upon the full, certified popular vote from each state or any other metric, for whatever merit such arguments may or may not be worth.

At best, this would seem to add seventy-five or so pledged delegates to the Clinton campaign and would not likely change the race dynamic.  It is also the most correct outcome by the rules as I understand them, and would be unassailable by either campaign and the Clinton campaign in particular.

Please comment on any misunderstanding of the rules.

Please add a more definitive estimate of the Clinton campaign's increase in pledged delegates based upon this solution.


There's more...

DNC Lawyers: Fla., Mich. can't be fully restored

According to this AP article, a memo released today states that even if they wanted to, they couldn't seat the full delegates in FL and MI.

WASHINGTON - A Democratic Party rules committee has the authority to restore delegates from Michigan and Florida but not fully seat the two states at the convention as Hillary Rodham Clinton wants, according to a party analysis.

Party rules require that the two states lose at least half of their convention delegates for holding elections too early, Democratic National Committee lawyers wrote in a 38-page memo.

The memo was sent late Tuesday to the 30 members of the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee, which plans to meet Saturday to consider the fate of convention delegates from the two states. The party is considering plans to restore at least some of the delegates to make sure the two important general election battlegrounds will be included at the nominating convention in August

I guess this will make for a more subdued meeting this weekend.

Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger.

There's more...

"3 out of 4 want the race to continue" - Pew Poll

An open letter to the media:

Just thought you probably didn't know that Pew Research did a poll this week and guess what?

They discovered that:

85% of the people had been following stories of Obama and the media trying  to push Hillary out of the race.

22% were following American Idol

11% had seen stories of Jenna's wedding.

Outcome: 72% of people were upset with what they saw the media and Obama doing trying to push Hillary out and want the race to continue.

There's more...

Q & A: When did HRC start caring about "the process"?

The owner of this site writes, in the current lead MyDD article:

[...] Clinton, I'm betting, has more interest in using her capital to reform the nomination process.

I support the idea that the Democrats ought to simplify the party's nominating process. But I have some questions (and answers) prompted by Jerome's observation:

1. QUESTION: Why did we never hear a peep from Bill or Hillary Clinton in the 1992 and 1996 elections about how the nomination process was flawed?

ANSWER: Because the process worked in their favor in those election cycles.

[ More Q & A after the jump... ]

There's more...


Advertise Blogads