Now that there's been a tentative understanding on Michigan & Florida...
...and, more importantly, now that The Green Papers has noticed it...
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | DNC | Hillary Clinton | The Best Democratic Primary EVER — Comments (13) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
(H/T AoSHQ)
...let us look at the last set of numbers.
As per TGP, there are 4,234 "votes" (there are too many half-delegates now to ignore); either candidate will thus need 2,118 "votes" to win. Obama has 2,052 (1,723.5, not including super-delegates) "votes"; Clinton has 1,876.5 (1,586.5, not including super-delegates). There are 86 pledged "votes" left, and 191 super-delegate "votes." Obama needs 65 "votes" (or twice what Plouffe is telling everybody that he needs); Clinton needs 241.5. Obama will not get 76% of the remaining pledged votes in the next three elections, so he needs more super-delegates. Clinton needs to poach a significant portion of Obama's existing support to win at the convention. As 16% of his support is pretty much free to jump at any time, this is not actually impossible (how probable is of course the question).
So, essentially, today has: made it impossible for Obama to even claim that he's clinched the nomination after MT/SD's results without last-minute super-delegate additions; confirmed that Clinton's only real chance is in raiding Obama's existing supporters, and put the remaining uncommitted super-delegates in a position where they are going to be reviled whether they jump one way, the other, or - especially - not at all.
Conclusions?
Don't ever put the Democratic Party in charge of planning your wedding.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Pop Quiz, Hot Shots — Comments (30) »
Now that there's been a tentative understanding on Michigan & Florida... 13 Comments (0 topical, 13 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Even though recent history has made it abundantly clear just how little democrats actually care for the letter or even the intent of election laws (see Florida 2000, Torricelli/Lautenberg 2002, etc, etc, etc,…), it still amazes me how they have now completely bastardized the fundamental unit of democracy…the vote.
It may be only fitting that the party of Jefferson has not only one-upped the delegate with the SUPER-delegate but has now introduced the sub-electoral particle known as the half-delegate. I can’t wait to see what they come up with next.
Ntrepid
Proud Member for 3 Years and 36 Weeks
"Everybody has an agenda. Except for me." - Michael Crichton, State of Fear.
Also never put them in charge of our public schools, health system, governmental budgets, countries, states, counties, cities, oil exploration... oh, the list is endless!!!
What I haven't found a straight answer for is the FL and MI Supers. There was one proposal that said the delegates would be 1/2 votes but the supers would be full.
So if thats the case, how many of the supers went to Barack? Was Hillary screwed even further by making some half and some full (thus making Barack''s supers worth more).
If so now McCain needs to point out in Florida ads that the DNC believes 1 FL Activist Leader(1 Super Delegate) is worth somewhere around 25,000 Floridian's votes. DNC party of the people, yeah, thats why the people's votes are worth nothing to them.
Perhaps the next step of her grand strategy is to have all naturally inferior primary delegates…you know, those from red states…officially downgraded by the Party.
(It seems to me that they have already been making this case for quite some time…in a much more subtle manner, of course.)
This correction would probably (I haven’t actually done the math) put her over the top for good and, once again, the Democrats will have…after the fact… fixed the obviously erroneous rules of the game to give “us” the proper outcome.
All together now: “Count Every Fractional Vote!”
Ntrepid
Proud Member for 3 Years and 36 Weeks
"Everybody has an agenda. Except for me." - Michael Crichton, State of Fear.
If a state went blue in the last election it's receiving double delegates.
So Florida is really getting quarter delegates. MI is getting half delegates.
Seems completely counterintuitive. Blue states are most likely to go blue, waiting the delegates to closely decided states would make the most sense. Well that's the Dems for you.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Not sure what the ratios are, but states that voted for Bush in 2004 receive a bump in comparison to states that did not.
...some weird restriction in the Democratic primary system ("a mandatory minimum percentage of left-handed people as delegates," or "no use of mimeographed materials at the caucus"), and somebody would be able to find an example of it actually happening somewhere.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Some committee member from DC said something to the effect of, "Let's just figure out now what the 2012 delegate totals are and we can save time down the road."
Dont' they just award bonus delegates to states that vote Democratic? That's how we do it anyway; states that went for Bush get a heap of bonus statewide delegates.
I used to accept credit card payments. On the vendor side processing a credit card transaction has a significant cost. Unfortunately you can't charge more for using a credit card. I offered a discount for cash or check and raised my prices across the board.
You vote if your vote counts less it counts less. You can call it what you like.
The criticism about rewarding the states that voted for your side in an election is applicable to our side. The reward for winning is winning. Your guy is in office for four years. Your people have access and clout they wouldn't have otherwise. Delegate bonuses should be applied to states you want to win or think you have a chance at winning. If nothing else it generates more activists where you need them.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Fewer delegates means fewer people get to say they were a DNC delegate.
So the difference between adding more taking away some is huge, politically.
This is actually a historical big deal in the Democratic party. They had a rule for a long time that states could never lose delegates, which is a big part of why they have so many more than we do.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !