Yawn.

This is starting to resemble the number of angels that could dance on the head of a pin. It's intellectually interesting, but it does not matter one bit.

WTF, the popular vote does still not count.

If you'll excuse the mixed metaphor, a fixed formula won't let the Clintons move the goal posts anymore. Bad news for her, good news for Democrats.

There is no such thing as the popular vote in a primary.

There never has been.

I'd rather split them in 1/2 overall and not this .5 crap, but whatever. Seems fair enough. Let's do it. On to the general!

None of this matters at this point. Clinton will appeal any compromise, no matter what, to the Credentials Committee. The supers will roll out for Obama on the 4th after the last primary. Everyone will acknowledge that Obama has an insurmountable lead even with full seating of the rogue states, except for Hillary and Bill. Obama pivots full-time toward McCain, and party leaders support this in full. The rank and file eventually move on and fall in line. Hillary Clinton becomes a sideshow and a pariah within her own party until she either admits this thing over and suspends (not likely), Obama asks her to be his running mate (can't see it now), or she finally gets shot down on the convention floor (sad, but most likely of the three).

This thing is already written in stone. Hillary can hold her breath all she wants to, but she's no longer holding the cards.

Sounds fair to me. She can whine all she wants but at some point she'll just have to accept that she lost fair and square.

The Clinton partisans in the Michigan Democratic Party (Granholm, Levin, Brewer) have already communicated to the DNC that the 69-59 split was unacceptable--they're certainly not going to accept a 50-50 split.

Good, Hillary's immenent political demise will, hopefully, kill off not only the DLC but also, with any luck, pants suits.

My bad: 281 total, 195 undeclared supers.

Of course, she could argue that Florida's popular vote should now be added to the tally, though even that would almost certainly fail to overcome his lead by that metric.

I'm sure this has been mentioned above, but the popular vote is entirely irrelevant.

Basically it's 50/50, just like the original DNC rules really called for in this situation. Just like most people looking at the rules honestly, knew they would do.

And I actually think it's right to give her the few extra in FL as she would have probably won it even if they all had a chance to campaign there.

I see them going for it only if they believe they can make up the 164k vote difference in the popular vote when Florida is factored in but the four caucus states are not. Their sole goal since February has been to somehow "win" the "popular vote" so they can throw Obama's legitimacy into question and hopefully steal the nomination at the convention. Anything short of that is unacceptable (and obviously, the delegate numbers themselves are largely irrelevant to them).

Take it to the convention Clinton.

I'm obviously biased, but that sounds like an entirely reasonable compromise. Better than expected, actually.

Of course, maybe I should reserve my final opinion until I hear what concerns HillaryClinton08 has about this proposal...

Hillary has to understand that any decision on MI & FL is not going to deliver her the nomination. If she does not accept some sort of compromise on this and pushes to the convention, she is going to look really, really bad. Not just too the party but to the media and public in general. I foresee a major backlash against her.

Obama will cross the 2025 number next week, she will fight on, becoming increasingly irrelevant each passing week. The media will stop covering her antics. People will stop caring. The democratic establishment will coalesce around Obama. All but the truly die hard supporters will abandon her. When she reappears at the convention, she will be laughed of the stage. Not the way to go out if she cares a bit about her political future.

It's not going to the convention.

For Clinton to accept this compromise means she has acquired a reasonable approach to this issue. Does anyone see her accepting this? I don't and if she does accpet it; it will absolutely mean the end of her campaign. I only she her going to the convention and "staging" further that she is the stronger candidate. Bottom line party leaders need to stop this shit and put her out! No morequestions, no more issues, no more "screaming" about Fl/MI, no more popular vote! We need to keep focused on November and taking the White House back!

Clinton accept 50/50 in MI??

Wolfson was on CNN last night saying that if Obama gets one single delegate in MI, they're appealing this all the way to August.

She won't go with this deal - not sure how this is "gaining traction."

Godzilla, huh?

I think the movie CLOVERFIELD was inspired by Hillary's role as Senator of NY!

ROOOOARRR!!!!!!

Tweety opens his show once again with Iraqgate.
"There is truth here. It's what we've known all along. Someone is going to pay for this."

She already said no to one compromise that gave her more than 50% in Michigan, I thought.

Why is she going to turn around and take this?

According to this, 40 + Super Dels are waiting in the wings, to declare for Obama, some of the Clinton defectors.

Sounds like he has it locked up.

Also The times has a story up, saying it will be over next Wednesday. Hurray!
.....

The endorsement by US Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-California) of Obama today sends an extremely firm message to the Clinton campaign, and not only because he was, until today, a Clinton super delegate.

The Field has learned that Cardoza is the first of a group of at least 40 Clinton delegates, many of them from California, that through talking among themselves came to a joint decision that all of them would vote for Obama at the convention. They have informed Senator Clinton that it’s time to unite around Obama, and that they will be coming out, one or two at a time, and announcing their switch between now and the convention if Senator Clinton doesn’t do the same.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1258

This just in folks: She will never quit, even though Pelosi said today she would put an end to all this by the June 30 or so. From Huff Post:

Clinton Issues Post-Primary Schedule (Yes, Post-Primary Schedule)

May 29, 2008 2:04 PM

ABC News' Eloise Harper Reports: The press traveling with Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign received an email Thursday afternoon informing reporters they could sign up for travel through June 6 on the campaign website.

Given the speculation surrounding plausible outcomes from this Saturday's DNC Meeting and the final Democratic primaries on June 3, many confused looks passed between reporters on the back of the press bus.

When asked for comment, Clinton spokesman Jay Carson looked past Tuesday's primaries to the general election.

"There are a lot of places for us to go between June 4 and November," Carson said.

Harry Reid has also stated there will be no convention fight:

In an interview with KGO after his radio appearance, Reid said, "The time has come to make a decision. I think we need a general election that’s 5 months. I don’t think August is enough time."

He suggested the Democratic primary "will be ended a couple days after June 3rd."

This is down now to the superdelegates. And probably, simple math indicates that, next Tuesday, after we get the results from Puerto Rico on Sunday and South Dakota and Montana on Tuesday, Obama will probably have the necessary number at that time anyway," he said.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/democratic-lead.html

heh

Her next step is to try and forcibly remove all the caucus states from the Union.

Fortunately, the likelyhood of that scenario is roughly equal to her winning the nomination under any other conditions.

I am going to go grab a xanax now.

No matter what "compromise" is reached on Saturday she is not going to be happy with it.

Those supporters/protesters are wasting their time, there is no way she is going to get what she wants which is every delegate in FL and MI.

Do they even understand that they will not make a difference? Or rather, do they know tthat they are supposed to be "protesting"?

Clinton seeks compromise in the same way Bush does. She isn't interested in 'resolving' this issue, because not even giving her everything and Obama nothing results in her getting the nomination. She just wants to hold onto the FL/MI debacle as a convenient doorstop that lets her take this to the convention floor.

It's all about opportunism with her.

And to think I used to be OK with the idea of her being President just a few months ago....

I'm curious to know who floated this "compromise" to Chuck Todd.
I hope it's true, though I have my doubts.
It's sure to win Obama's approval, and if the affected states buy it, it signals their complete abandonment of Hillary's children's crusade.
Could it be the RBC members have decided they need to administer some tough love to get the message through that it's time for her to stand down?
Will she get the not-so-subtle message?
Stay tuned.
Actually, tune in. I'll be up at 9 (a rare occurrence) to catch the fireworks if any on CNN.

Whatever happened to the famed Clinton art-of-compromise and triangulation?

Oh, I guess the Clinton's compromise my interests but will never compromise on their own.

I really am beginning to wish that Bill was impeached in 1998. Not only would we be rid of the Clintons once and for all, but it's likely that we wouldn't have seen GWB in the White House (the backlash on extreme GOPism would have brought in McCain in 2000, in all likelihood).

Why in HELL do we keep repeating this 'popular vote' meme? WHY? WHY?
Precisely!!

Why is the popular vote being 'considered' by the MSM as a VALID argument for Hillary to EVEN MAKE!!

Greg seems to get implicit when he wants to say HRC is not attacking Obama by not mentioning his name but yet now he wants to say that implicit means the popular vote DOESN't count? WTF? Implicit is what is unstated and what is unstated is that it is INVALID.

What counts when something is implicit is the perception and validity of the act/argument. In this case when no one is coming out and EXPLICITLY rebutting and denouncing and rejecting this 'popular vote' argument it leaves the impresssion that somehow it SHOULD be considered.

That is blatantly FALSE. The popular vote should NOT be considered at all in the primaries as the primary is a nomination process where the only metric for winning is DELEGATES.

Whether folks want to'consider' that the sky is green is not the issue.

The issue is the sky is blue and that DELEGATES are the ONLY metric.

I too am sick of TPM, and folks like Greg not specifically refuting the argument when they claim to only be reporting Hillary's 'argument and her right to make it'

Well got darn it,,the press has the right, responsiblity and obligation to REFUTE the argument as WELL!!!

It is no different than folks saying Obama was a muslim and that it was a rumor but never once saying it was a FALSE rumor.

Greg Sargent wrote an entire piece on that fallacious argument when he was being unbiased in his HorsesMOuths days.

This 'popular vote' argument is no different it is specious and erroneous, no matter if people want to consider it.

The first thing to do is refute it...folks get to consider all types of shyt...don't mean it is right.

In fact, they call that OPINIONS not FACTS. Everyone gets to have an opinion but they are not entitled to their own FACTS.

Sargent is negligent in reporting the FACTS!! And by not doing so it throws the entire process into question and keeps folks beleiving falsely that it IS somehow a legitimate argument and it is not.

Like someone else said ...it is like a football game where in the third quarter they decide that who wins the game will be based on who gained the most yards as opposed to who scored the most points!

That is wrong and no matter who says it should be 'considered' no one sits there and says it is their right to make the yards gained argument WITHOUT first stating that the game is DECIDED by points..touchdowns and fieldgoals. They INVALIDATE the argument FIRST......THEEEN they consider it because everyone is on board with it being an excerise in futility..it is just for 'fun'.

No one is INVALIDATING this argument in the MSM or here on TPM.

All we get are these non-denial denials from folks like Sargent about them not saying it was right..when the point is you didn't clearly REBUT it as false.

This nomination process is decided by DELEGATES and that needs to be stated clearly, repeatedly and emphatically each and every single time anyone brings up the popular vote as a metric.

Bill Clintons entire argument needs to be taken down HEAD ON.

rebutted

refutted

rejected
and

denounced as completely FALSE!

The compromise is going to piss everyone off. As long as we're all prepared for that, I'd say we've got a winner.

Of course, she could argue that Florida's popular vote should now be added to the tally...

And that would matter exactly how, Greg? What, this is now a national election? The rules have changed somehow? Now the national popular vote matters? I'm not getting your point. Maybe you need a vacation.

She could also argue that:

1). God wants her to be president, and God's endorsement should be worth a thousand votes at the convention.

2). Pantsuits are cooler than regular suits, therefore the DNC should double her current delegate count.

3). She drinks whiskey. Obama drinks beer. She wins.

4). The wife of a former president gets first dibs.

5). Since African-Americans won the right to vote before women, it's only fair that a woman should get to be president first.

6). She really, really, really, REALLY wants to win.

7). She's waited longer.

8). She knows where the bathrooms are, thus she's ready from Day One.

9). She's been drastically outspent.

10). Sexism.

Of course none of those arguments would be any more or less valid than her bullshit national popular vote argument. But you knew that already, right Greg?

Seriously, are you for real?

Still pushing the face scratch eh?

Mercy.

It's pretty straight forward, thanks to Poblano:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/adventures-in-lannyland.html

Sorry, Hillary folks. Now can we please get on with this, and unite behind the eventual nominee?

Hillary does not care about the party. Hillary does not care about the country. Hillary does not care about the world. She cares about one thing, and one thing only: being seated on the throne. She is willing to throw the party, the country, the world under the bus so she will have a shot at the Dem nomination when McCain wins the presidency in 2008 after she successfully divides the party beyond repair. STFU MRS. CLINTON! You are losing all credibility here, there and everywhere. STAND DOWN! This is NOT about you!