Delegate Update, March 15th

by: Chris Bowers

Sat Mar 15, 2008 at 14:00


A Michigan plan for a full primary revote on June 3rd is nearing completion:

The four negotiators -- U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, National Committeewoman Debbie Dingell, Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick and UAW President Ron Gettelfinger -- put out a statement this afternoon that said: "At this time we are focusing on the possibility of a state-run primary in early June, which would not use any state funding. This option would require the passage of legislation by the State Legislature, and we look forward to working with the members of the Legislature in the coming days to see if this option can be made a reality."

In addition to the legislature, such plan would also, apparently, require $10,000,000 to be raised to hold the event, and for the Obama campaign to approve. I have no idea about the money, but I can't imagine a good reason why the Obama campaign would turn this proposal down. A revote in Michigan would poke a big hole in the "uncertainty strategy" the Clinton campaign is employing, and make Obama's path to the nomination much more obvious. Personally, I like the plan because it puts the Michigan nonsense behind us, and forces both candidates to organize around the country straight through June 3rd.

Meanwhile in Florida, Bill Nelson is floating a half-nelson plan:

With the Florida Democratic Party's proposed mail-in do-over of its Jan. 29 presidential primary drawing more heat than support, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson began floating the idea Friday of seating half the state's 186 pledged delegates at the party's national convention.

Nelson said he spoke Friday with both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the Senate floor about the plight of Florida and Michigan, the two states stripped of delegates because their early primaries violated national rules.

"Both of them said, `You have to seat Florida and Michigan.' Now, of course, the devil is in the details,'" Nelson said.

The Nelson plan still gives Clinton the edge, based on her 17 percentage-point win in January. But instead of gaining 38 delegates, Clinton's victory margin in Florida would be reduced to 19.

While I am not thrilled with Florida only receiving half-votes, I would be fine with this compromise. It allows the Edwards delegates to still attend the convention, and probably projects the delegate advantage Clinton would have had in the state if both candidates had campaigning vigorously there. I hope it is accepted, and we can just move forward with our lives.

If both deals were accepted, the delegate projection chart would look like this:

Democratic Nomination Campaign Delegate Projection
Delegate Type Obama Clinton Other Remaining
Pledged 1,442 1,305 32.5 694
Super 209 255 0 292.5
Projected Add-ons 40 25.5 0 14
Total 1,691 1,585.5 32.5 1,000.5

50% + 1 would be 2,155, leaving Obama 464 delegates, or 46.2% of the remaining delegates, shy of clinching. The nomination would probably be narrowly sealed either on June 3rd, or at some point later in the month once enough superdelegates endorse. Clinton would need 53.8% of the remaining delegates in order to force a brokered convention with the Edwards delegates, and 56.7% in order to win outright.

Also, the Iowa county conventions are today. There is a good chance that some of the 14 Edwards delegates will switch to either Obama or Clinton.

Chris Bowers :: Delegate Update, March 15th

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Interesting (0.00 / 0)
how the jerkoff Dems of MI and FL may now be positioned to get what they broke the rules for in the first place: being the Deciders of who gets nominated. I guess karma is on vacation.

No, it's in full effect (0.00 / 0)
The decision to deny Michigan and Florida the same privilege that is granted without question to Iowa and New Hampshire was the dick move in the first place. This was such a patently unjust and undemocratic thing to do, it's fitting that it's going to be to some degree negated.

[ Parent ]
So why stop with MI and FL? (0.00 / 0)
Maybe the rules suck. There are pretty good arguments on both sides. Your argument, however, that it's OK to break the rules if they don't work for you, has only the side formerly known as Wrong. I guess you want to let the reigning idiots in every state keep leapfrogging until primary season is over three years before the general election.

Of course the real problem is, as usual, the dysfunctional US electoral "system". It's way past time to set primary schedules by federal law, with no input from states or from parties.


[ Parent ]
No, and yes. (0.00 / 0)
The parties have first amendment associational rights to construct their primaries as they see fit (so long as the Voting Rights Act, etc., are respected).  This shouldn't be determined by Congress.

At the same time, I absolutely agree with your first point: for the DNC to be able to enforce a good primary schedule, you have to honor its ability to enforce a sub-optimal one as well.


[ Parent ]
Depends .. (4.00 / 1)
because of Michigan gets a revote .. and the Nelson plan is adopted for Florida ..  that is a huge win for Obama .. and wasn't it Clinton's camp that wanted all the primaries pushed up to begin with?

[ Parent ]
Question (0.00 / 0)
Are the projected delegates for the future contests straight-up reflections of the polls as they stand today, or are they weighted one way or the other to give one candidate their "best case scenario"?

it's not that simple (4.00 / 1)
There are two towns in Michigan still under "preclearance" rules under the Voting Rights Act, and as such the USDOJ has to approve of any changes in voting for the state.

I also don't get why the campaigns have a say in this -- if Michigan passes a new primary and the DNC approves of it, the candidates will have to show up regardless of what they think of it, no?


I don't get that either... (0.00 / 0)
The candidates should have no say in the decisions to hold new elections. I don't see how either of them - Senators of Other states - would have any technical ability to stop it from happening. All the can do is offer persuasive arguments and engage in public hand-wringing.  

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

[ Parent ]
Absolutely right (0.00 / 0)
Hold them and the candidates will come....it's idiotic to give either campaign veto power...or any input at all.

Did they get any input in designing any of the other caucuses or primaries?

 

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller


[ Parent ]
like you, i follow this stuff pretty closely (4.00 / 1)
and i must say that every 6-12 hours there is a new voting proposal for either FL or Mi which promptly gets shot down over the following 6-12 hours. Because this requires at least four parties to buy in : clinton, obama, respective state party and the DNC; it is more likely that these are trial balloons looking for popular support to leverage against one of the four. it is apparent that getting buy-in from all four groups on any one plan is looking less and less likely.

i am not making any predictions but i think a fairly large dose of skepticism is appropriate.


Florida (0.00 / 0)
I don't buy the idea that Clinton should come out of this mess owning 19 delegates from Florida.  What kind of Party tells its voters and candidates that an election will not count for anything, and then turns around and says, "Whoops, I guess we are going to count some of those votes after all?"

A 50/50 split is a fair way to resolve this mess.  Neither candidate benefits from this unfortunate rules snafu, and the delegates from FL and MI get to participate at the convention.


Is Obama favored in Mi? (0.00 / 0)
with more Union Support+AA's, and considering Clinton's rather pathetic showing last time?

Only at the Iowa state convention (0.00 / 0)
do we get the final tally of delelgates.  this is only the 2nd step of a 3 step process.  The same rules apply as the caucus....15% threshold means you have to go to another candiate or uncommitted.  Any delelgate can change their mind....and if you don't show up you have o vote....the alternate gets to take your place.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller


Pennsylvania (0.00 / 0)
I remember reading awhile back that Clinton did not fill out paperwork or something to do with delegates and I thought is related to Penn primary, has that issue been resolved?

not legally relevant (0.00 / 0)
They can sub in names for awarded delegates later.

[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox