Will it be a brokered convention

Thinking of the states to come:  WA, NE, LA, Maine, VA, MD, etc., it seems to me more results similar to supertuesday are to come where it is close and the delegates are split.  

But I've been thinking about it: Right now Clinton has 1012 and Obama 933 (see www.realpolitics2008.com).  Clinton needs another ONE THOUSAND delegates to win.  So does Obama.  Where in the h-e-double-hockey-sticks do they intend to find an additional 1,000 each?  

I honestly do not see a sweep in either direction.  PA and TX are the last really delegate-rich states.  But PA and TX only equal 400+ all together.  So even if one or the other got all of PA and TX, they would still split the rest down the middle and never reach 2025.  I honestly feel that without Florida, we will inevitably go to a brokered convention.  Is my reasoning off?

Tags: brokered, clinton, delegates, obama (all tags)

Comments

12 Comments

Re: Will it be a brokered convention
Well, the implied narrative right now goes something like this: Clinton is running out of money while Obama is continuing to raise it at a $30,000,000 per month rate. The next contests are also in states where Obama has tended to do well. Hillary needs to hold on and, somehow, raise some money between now and March when the calendar is more favorable. Meanwhile, Barack racks up wins, delegates, and momentum. By the time March roles around, Hillary is still strapped for cash, and Obama is more popular than ever. It's hard not to believe that Obama has a huge advantage. Maybe it'll play out differently, but that's how the story reads right now.
by vj 2008-02-06 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

I think they'll find a way to count Florida and Michigan.  Dean has hinted as much.  There's really no way they can afford to disenfranchise those states.

by randym77 2008-02-06 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

If that's the strategy, it might be best to reconsider.

If it comes to the convention and Obama leads in pledged delegates without counting Florida and Michigan -- but Hillary leads if Florida and Michigan are counted -- just imagine what it will look like to try to seat those delegates!

The storyline (at least from the Obama side, and millions of people in this country who feel the same) would be:  Obama has won the majority of delegates from the contested states and is therefore poised to be the first African-American nominee for president, but Hillary Clinton wants to take that away by seating delegates in states where no one competed, including one where she was the only one on the ballot!  (Yes, I know about the couple of cable TV ads that ran nationally and so also ran in Fla., but seriously....)

The roar of protest would be so loud, I think every window in the country would break.  

Is that really gonna be the strategy?!

P.S.  It would be equally outrageous if Clinton won the majority of the pledged delegates and Obama tried to pull something tricky to get the nomination.  I feel that the superdelegates should line up so as to give effect to the vote of the people in this, no matter whether that's Clinton or Obama.

by Bluebeard 2008-02-06 01:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

It's more than just Clinton vs. Obama.  IMO, this could be the difference between winning Florida and losing it.  Which, as we know from 2000, could be the difference between winning the White House and losing it.

by randym77 2008-02-06 02:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

And what about the Obama voters -- millions of them, many of them new to the party, young, and energized -- who would be disenfranchised by a craven attempt to steal the nomination with this tactic?

You're only looking at how the Fla. voters would feel -- people who knew (if they were reading the papers, etc. as Hillary supporters insist) that their votes weren't supposed to count.

What about the rest of the country?

I realize that there are arguments on both sides (though the Hillary argument for seating Michigan is beyond me -- what is it again??).  But this isn't a situation like Gore-Bush in 2000 where FL voters went in and had every reason to have their votes counted, but they weren't.

This is a situation where, if the FL and MI delegates are seated and that costs Obama the election, voters in EVERY state in the country who voted for Obama and "played by the rules" are going to feel, with good reason, like their votes didn't amount to anything.

If you have to choose one of those results, which do you choose?

by Bluebeard 2008-02-06 02:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

Why are those voters more important than the millions in MI and FL who voted? That's what you're saying.

The best case scenario is for Hillary to win the primary. Then no one will have a problem with MI and FL.

Obama wins the primary and loses the election because he said "FL and MI don't count."

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-06 02:48PM | 0 recs
I see both sides........

and I also see an African American backlash if Hillary wins by superdelegates alone.  Basically, just so you know, it was the Republicans in Florida and Michigan that attempted to screw the Democrats by moving up their primary.  Dean, however, dropped the ball and should have counted at least 50 percent of the Democratic delegates.  But in any case, changing the rules after the fact is not fair.  

This is going to get ugly, if you ask me.  

by Sandy1938 2008-02-06 02:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

I don't see it as craven, or an attempt to "steal" the election.  I see it as only fair.  (And I would say the same, no matter who won Florida.)  The GOP are the ones who moved the primary.  Why should the Democrats suffer for it?  Certainly the rank and file Democratic voters had nothing to do with it.  They deserve to have their votes counted.  I call that "democracy," not "stealing."

I don't think seating the Florida delegates is unfair to Obama.  He was on the ballot, just like she was, and neither campaigned in the state.

Michigan is more problematic, because Obama wasn't even on the ballot.  Not sure what can be done about that.  Perhaps the delegates could be released to vote as they wished or something.

Hopefully, it won't matter.  But if it does...I think seating the delegates is the fairest thing to do.  And the smartest, when it comes to the electoral math.

And like I said...Dean has already just about said it's going to happen.

by randym77 2008-02-06 03:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

Here's the total "vote of the people" in all of the contests so far:

Clinton: 55%
Obama: 45%

by hwc 2008-02-06 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

Based on the delegate counts on RCP, 1012 for Clinton and 933 for Obama, Clinton will need to win 54% of the remaining delegates to be nominated and Obama will need to win 58% of the remaining delegates. That includes pledged and superdelegates.

The problem is, the calendar for February favors Obama. He has the cash, the momentum and the movement. The media is going to kill Clinton's campaign. Of course, unless that is a huge Obama bombshell we don't know about (highly unlikely). All the delegates are not in yet, so I don't know exactly how many states Obama won with 58%+ of the delegates.

by RJEvans 2008-02-06 01:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

Unless both are on the ticket- there are going to be many people pissed off- probably enough to hand McCain the election.

How that can happen, to get them both on to the satisfaction of both- I don't know- doesn't seem likely right now- I think we're doomed to have a McCain presidency.  It makes me really sad.

by reasonwarrior 2008-02-06 02:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Will it be a brokered convention

It's a huge mistake. Best case scenario is for Hillary to win the primary then none of the FL & MI stuff will matters. Obama wins the primary and then goes on to lose the election.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-06 02:51PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads