Hillary Could Net Anywhere From Six To 19 Delegates Out Of Florida Seating
Here's a bit more on what the actual impact could be of the DNC's legal memo yesterday saying that the Rules and Bylaws Committee only has the authority to seat half the delegations.
It appears that Rules and Bylaws can proceed down one of two tracks here if they seat half the delegations. Either they can seat the whole delegation and have each vote counted as a half-vote, or then can cut the delegation in half and seat that.
And as if this weren't complex enough already, it turns out that each of those solutions would give the candidates a different number of delegates. Chuck Todd explains:
As for the actual meeting itself, there's one more angle you ought to be aware of: a 50% cut and a halving of the delegates is not the same thing. For instance, if Florida delegates are seated in their entirety, but only have their vote counted as a .5, then Clinton will net approximately 19 delegates out of the state. But if the delegation is cut in half, that's done in every congressional district as well as statewide, then suddenly Clinton's advantage is only a net of six.
So, a net gain for Hillary from Florida of roughly six or 19 delegates. Marc Ambinder says there is reason to believe that the Obama camp might be able to accept a 19-delegate net gain for Hillary. Michigan, meanwhile, is an entirely different morass...
One more week of this stupidity and then mean-pants-lady will be gone.
I can't wait.
May 29, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hallelujah!
May 29, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, did you see anywhere in that piece how many delegates Obama will get? Or isn't that important on TPM?
May 29, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is not her total it is her net gain. That is all that matters. Since Obama is ahead by 162 pledged delegates (according to CNN ymmv) a net gain of 19 for Hillary will cut his lead to a measly 143.
May 29, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is she putting us through all this shit for six delegates? We'll have that many SDs announce for Obama between today and tomorrow.
May 29, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let her have the damn 19 - I think that would be the best thing to shut her up about Florida.
MI is a bigger mess and what makes me so damn mad about that is that it was a mess she calculated on and is responsible for - her and Granholm - and she is hell bent to take advantage of the mess she purposely made in order to take advantage of it.
which, as I've said 1000 times, is why I got so mad about all the talk and the talk and the talk about Popular Votes. Everyone played right into her hands on that.
And now we're mired in Hillary's Campaign Strategy vis-a-vis Michigan.
But let her have the 19, and I hope it shuts her up.
May 29, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can't be serious.
May 29, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know - I insist somewhere under this bitchy cynicism on being an optimist.
I don't know why - I was born this way. I've been kicked while I'm down often enough that one would think between that and defending close to a thousand murderers on appeal, I would have abandoned that optimism altogether.
But I can dream. ;)
May 29, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tena, is this true? You're a defense attorney? And you're from Texas? Do you know John Kroger?
May 29, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes it's true - I was a criminal defense lawyer on the appellate level in Dallas. I've been retired for quite awhile now - I had to quit to take care of my mom.
The name is familiar, but to be honest with you, it's familiar for another reason, I think.
Kroger is one of our major supermarkets here. LOL! So I'm not sure I'm responding to the name for the right reason. Anyway - why? Unless you'd rather not say...
I was good friends with Peter Lessor and Larry Mitchell, friends too with Barry Sorrells, and knew Kerry Fitzgerald well. But see, that was a long time ago.
May 29, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
John was one of the Enron prosecutors, and he recently won the Democratic primary here in Oregon for Attorney General.
And he's also is my next door neighbor.
:)
May 29, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
O cool -
naw, see, I don't though I bet I know the name because of Enron.
I've been retired now for - let me think how long Mom has been dead - about 14, 15 years I guess. I quit a couple of years before she died.
May 29, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Defending murderers? I knew there was something subversive about you. ;)
Next thing you know you'll be defending noted Islamofascist Rachel Ray.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/29/news/companies/dunkin_donuts.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008052910
May 29, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Terrorist scarves!
May 29, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is jaw-dropping!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Call the fuckin ACLU - that's why I send them $25 every month.
May 29, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jihad is delish!
May 29, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not the scarf that's the problem -- it's just her voice that's the weapon of mass destruction.
May 29, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think she's serious about letting her have the 19 (and so am I)...is she serious about Hillary shutting up? That's another question.
May 29, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
You'd need duct tape, an exorcist and a muzzle made of adamantium to shut her up.
May 29, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you Tena, giving her the 19 delegates would be worth it if she STF up. But Lanny and others have indicated that they will stop at nothing short of seating the entire delegation and plan to take the fight to the convention floor.
Regretfully, by letting the Clinton forces have their way - it will only embolden them. I see no easy solution as Hillary no longer cares about the November elections and is willing to risk everything to prove some hard-to-fathom point. Does the devil where pants suits???
May 29, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Chuck,
You are absoluutely one hundred percent right!!
Giving them anything will embolden them. An inch is a MILE, to them.
Obama needs to stick with precedent which means that the delegation is cut in half. None of this 0.5 shyt!
First off, it was THEIR proposal so obviously they sat down and came up with a 'screwObama' tactic, why in HELL should he accept that?
The first rule they should stand on is that, these primaries are NON-binding!! The rules were that FL and MI would not COUNT. To give them any value at the end of the game is simply plain wrong.
That is the first and foremost stand the campaign should take. ANY decisions post the end of primaries should be able to null and void the rules of the game from jump. That is blantantly unjust.
If we seat the delegation, we should make it so that the number of delegates HILLARY needs to be the nominee is HIGHER because SHE broke the rules.
The number of delegates Obama needs to win the nomination remains the same, because he followed the rules.
Frankly, I do not know why Hillary should gain anything from this process whatsoever. This nomination process should not be geared to provide her any concession because she broke the rules. She has incited havoc and chaos against the party rules with all her blather about the popular vote, when the nomination process is about delegates NOT the popular vote. So she has willfully and intentionally mislead and misconstrued the very rules that guide the process and make it a level playing field for all candidates. Why should she benefit from that? She should be penalized.
If the process is in anyway altered the outcome should be in the favor of the candidate who DID follow the rules not the RULE BREAKER.
It is no different from a fight...the person who threw the first punch gets a harsher penalty, the same thing with crime..the ringleader gets a greater sentence.
The outcome of this entire process should be to penalize the rulebreaker and the one who inciting all the controversy, otherwise we can anticipate having this same sort of challenge and nonsense year after year.
If you break the rules, if you encourage the rules to be broken then you need to have a penalty.
If not, why the hell have the candidates sign a friggin pledge to begin with. She was not to PARTICIPATE in any manner in the way she did. She did so anyway in clear violation of the rules and process.
PENALIZE HER. Change the number of delegates needed for her to win to a higher number. If she can diminish the value of caucuses...the DNC can raise the number of delegates she needs.
No concessions!! Half the delegates and raise the number she needs to win.
May 29, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am violent agreement with you vicissitudes.
The basic laws of negotiating is that you don't give away everything without getting something in return. Hillary clan has made it obvious they are using a take-no-prisoner approach. By granting concessions now without some reciprocal act on her part, this will make the negotiations during the convention even that more difficult. Know your opponent - dont give away the farm for nothing in return!
The basic mistake a lot of people are making here is that Hillary will attempt to be reasonable - the only way she can win is by being unreasonable. That is why the Obama team must be readay for hard-ball negotiations.
May 29, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been waiting in vain for anyone, good god ANYONE on the MSM to bring up the fact that many people in MI (where I'm from) and I'm guessing FL too were led to believe their vote wouldn't count because the delegates were stripped. They need to bring that up and rub it in Terri's face and any other Clintonite who bemoans the loss of democracy in not counting votes in those states. Even if you see them sleeze their way past the fact that Obama wasn't on the ballot in MI, was in FL, yadda yadda, they need to be asked how they can justify counting an election where people were essentially led to believe that their vote wouldn't count.
But they can't. And God bless the media that in the face of McClellen's new book claims they did ask the hard questions but were stiffled by the network biggies. I'd like to know their excuse now outside of bad reporting.
May 29, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.
For the most part what you are saying is that the candidates were told those primaries WOULD NOT COUNT along with the voters. So any concessions that are made now would be penalizing the people who FOLLOWED the rules.
Obama should not be penalized. HRC should be. She not only broke the rules but benefitted from Obama following the rules.
No concession. The number of delegates needed to win this nomination were set when MI and FL were excluded. To bring them in now and change the total delegates needed would be FRAUDULENT.
Voters also have no rights because this is a primary conducted by PRIVATE political parties. The only time voters can be disenfranchised is in the general election, so this part of the argument is null and void. The popular vote does not determined the President nor does it determine the Democratic nominee. The DNC nomination process clearly states that the nominee is chosen by winning the most delegates as set forth by the DNC.
May 29, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are you -- Neville Chamberlain?
Seriously, I think you're right. Give it to her, it doesn't change anything and it's probably good for Obama to continue being the magnanimous grown-up dealing with the spoiled brat here.
Also, as you say, Michigan is royally fucked up and I don't see a solution short of assigning the uncommitteds to Obama since he followed the party's rules and took his name off the ballot.
May 29, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
19 huh. Yeah, that'll *really* put a dent in that 200 delegate lead.
As for Michigan, she absolutely positively should not get any delegates from that 45 percent that voted AGAINST her. Give them to any other candidate, fine, but since her name was on the ballot, they should not go to her. We cannot know exactly what the uncommitted voters did want, but we can know very clearly what they did NOT want.
May 29, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pretty sure a lot of people will be surprised when they find out that Hillary Clinton DID get a large portion of the uncommitted delegate share in MI at the District Conventions. Her team is not saying anything about this obviously, and Obama's should be saying more. So I don't know how the Rules Committee will deal with that little gem.
May 29, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wes Clark: Hillary Will Take Fight to Convention .
She wants all votes to count. Period.
May 29, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except for caucus states. And black voters. And the uncommitted votes in MI. Etc. Etc. Etc.
May 29, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi won't allow convention fight
May 29, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you Speaker Pelosi.
REAL leadership will not allow the Clintonistas to take this fight further.
Once the "voters have spoken" the supers will get in line behind Obama.
May 29, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi trying to end this thing is going to end ugly. I can see Clinton now. "Shame on you, Nancy Pelosi. We need to count every working, hard-working American, white American vote. Shame on you and your sexist ways."
May 29, 2008 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
And she won't allow impeachment...
May 29, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cue another threat to Pelosi by Hillary's "top donors."
May 29, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously. 6 or 19? Neither will make a hell of a difference.
May 29, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly correct!
May 29, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it will make a difference.
What is the role of delegates? Do they do anything other than cast a vote for the nominee?
Delegates from MI and FL should be cut in half.
That is the end of the story.
There need not be any further action taken than that.
No other arguments should even be considered.
Half the delegation. That is consistent with historical penalties.
Anything done to benefit Hillary will only make the matters worse.
Neither campaign has to agree to the halving of the delegation as that is the traditional penalty.
MI and FL were not part of the nomination process as they were ruled out at the beginning. Nothing that is done to include them now is fair to EITHER candidate. It is changing the rules at the end of the game.
Cut the delegation in halve. End of story.
May 29, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Delegates from MI and FL should be cut in half."
Interesting idea. I would support this.
May 29, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
No cutting Carl Levin in half. No cutting John Conyers in half. The rest of 'em? I'd have to see a list...
May 29, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
No cutting Dale Kildee in half either...
May 29, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you kidding me? She'll be appealing this whole mess throughout the entire summer! Six days, my ass!
May 29, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Precisely...and that is why the only action that should be taken is to cut the delegation in halve.That is consistent with prior precedence and the DNC can stand on that principle and not even consider all her other arguments or appeals.
Respect the rules.
May 29, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Toward the end of the DNC memo, they do offer a possible solution to the Michigan situation:
Seeing as Richardson and Edwards have both backed Obama, I imagine the result would be close to the 69/59 plan the MI officials have floated (just with more steps).
May 29, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, that along with the 1/2 seating rule (whichever way it works) pretty much tell us how this will work out.
I'd be very surprised to see the committee go beyond what their counsel advises is allowed. Obama can accept halving the delegations if he gets the uncomittted votes and will look magnanimous, since the committee will be going as far as it legally can to accomidate Clinton's position.
The Republicans won't be able to use the decision as an argument in the fall, since they've also halved the delegations from the two states.
And if Clinton goes on to the Credentials committee, so what? We know from the composition of that group that she can't win, particularly in attempting to overturn the decision of another committee. She'll become a spoiler pure and simple and be seen as that by all.
May 29, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do what is fair, and not what is expedient for the Clintons.
Do what is best for the party, and primaries going forward, after all, this is only one primary.
As I've read everywhere, she can't gain enough delegates to win the nomination unless a huge swath of Obama's switch.
This is meaningless. Do what is best for the party going forward.
May 29, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very well said.
And the best comment so far, too.
May 29, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
The bottom line is that a net gain of 6 or 19 delegates will do nothing for Hillary's prospects.
I would absolutely love to be a fly on the wall in Pelosi's office when she calls Hillary next week.
May 29, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I like the MI plan laid out where Hillary gets all her delegates and the rest (as per the 45% uncommitted vote) are allocated as Obama/Biden/Richardson/Edwards delegates. Since both Edwards and Richardson (and presumably Biden at some point) have endorsed Obama they can pledge their delegates to him. This negates the predictable charge from Clinton that you cannot give Obama all of the uncommitted delegates because you can't prove their intention to vote for him.
Of course, this solution doesn't punish Michigan and will likely piss off Florida should their delegations be cut in half.
My brain hurts. I need a couple of Tylenol and some strong whiskey...
May 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
This plan is only acceptable AFTER the delegation is cut in halve. Once that is done. It would be fine. As it is being done consistent with the DNC rules and the party as opposed to listening to any campaigns arguments.
May 29, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Clinton is not going to shut up for 6 or 19 delegates from Florida..... she and her supporters want all the delegates from florid and michigan seated with full votes..... so she ain't going to shut up.... I am looking forward to the convention....... :):)
And everyone thought this was going to be over by June 3rd.....hahahaha
May 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Hillary thought it would be over on February 5th...
But some of the posters here are historical revisionists.
May 29, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
... mcCain's best friend, ladies and gentlemen.
May 29, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
maybe she can stomp her feet. or hold her breath till she turns blue. ah, hard times for our lady of inevitablity.
May 29, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
It doesn't matter. Obama only needs 127 more delegates to win regardless of the whether FL or MI get sat as voted. That's if you don't give him any of the uncommitted votes from MI.
Let me restate that for you. If you give Clinton every single delegate in MI. Not just the ones she one, but every delegate that would have been available, Obama needs less than half of the remaining delegates to cross the nominating threshold. If you seat MI and FL as voted, Clinton needs 3 out of every 4 remaining delegates to swing her way to cross that same threshold.
You think that things are really very close and that MI and FL will swing it for her, but that's simply not true. She is WAY behind and can't catch up. FL and MI do nothing for her.
May 29, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
He only needs 127 IF the number to be the nominee is UNCHANGED.
Recall, HillandBill are saying if MI and FL are included then the total needed for the nomination will increase.
Someone needs to take on these arguments they are making and clearly refute and rebut them in the MSM.
Total delegates needed were stated at the outset of this nomination process. They should not be changed. The only binding primaries and caucuses are those which followed the party rules. MI and FL even if they are seated with half delegates should not determine the outcome of the nomination process simply because they BROKE the RULES.
May 29, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
YOu are mistaken he needs 127 if MI and FL are seated. If not he only needs 45. 2026 - 1981 = 45
May 29, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
25 or 6 to 4?
The Rules Committee and the SuperD's will end this by the end of next week. The only reason her campaign has a reason to continue is to find $$$ with which to pay back the $19 Million in debt that it has run up in this campaign. They are broke, with nowhere to go to get more $$$. If they continue to sh*t the bed, nobody will give her that money. And pro-Hillary 527 groups are not going to win her a nomination.
Wes Clark, Lanny Davis and others have to say that this is going to the convention, and sound like they mean it -- otherwise, the next 10 days is an even worse joke than it already is.
May 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I recall, the DNC rules provide for halving the number of delegates (the 6 vote margin scenario) of rogue primary states, not devaluing each delegates vote by one half (the 19 delegate margin scenario). This analysis might seem like a bit of lawyerly hair-splitting, but (1) I *am* a lawyer and that is what we do and (2) unless the rules get changed they are going to have to be followed because that is why they exist in the first place.
May 29, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
BUT there is the potential for the Clinton campaign to appeal any DNC RBC decision to the Credentials Committee, which meets ... you guessed it! ... on the first day of the Democratic National Convention.
I'll be watching on Saturday, but I'll be watching the theater and spin as much as the process. I think the sideshows will be more indicative of the Clinton campaign's long-(or short-)range plan.
May 29, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
And it makes a lot more sense to me to cut the value of the vote as opposed to refusing to seat half of the delegates, cause which half do you choose to piss off?
May 29, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It does not make more sense. We can piss off whomever we choose at this juncture as it is a matter of FOLLOWINg the RULES.
It does not make sense at all to do 0.5 because that is a cockamammy scheme cooked up by the Clinton camp to give her a tactical advantage in the nomination process.
There is historical precedent for halving the delegation and that is what should be done as it does not give any credence to either campaign and would be a neutral decision.
Doing halfpercent will not.
May 29, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Finally...
a post that makes consistent, historical sense based on the DNC rules and actions.
You are dead right.
Halve the delegation...end of story.
May 29, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
need a couple of Tylenol and some strong whiskey... I feel the same.....
Looking forward to seeing Hillary & John Go after each other.
May 29, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
what's she waiting for? the nominee has been going after mcCain for weeks.
May 29, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that'd be nice. It gets a little wearying watching her attack the Democratic nominee and the Democratic Party. I'm looking forward to anything and everything Hillary can do to help put Obama in the Oval Office.
May 29, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
THE RULES
ACCORDING TO HOYLERY.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/I/8/2/changing-the-rules-lk0523ad.jpg
May 29, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
it's uncanny - like the cartoonist has been a fly on the wall while they played.
May 29, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is taking another day off.
Lazy.
She will win PR by 300,000 votes.
May 29, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi won't allow convention fight
May 29, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. I hope PR doesn't go to McCain in the general.
Oh, wait...
May 29, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure she will!
In the primary in your mind.
May 29, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
how out of control is she? ...that is the question on everyone's minds.
May 29, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude nailed it.
May 29, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
While we're reallocating things, can we take Hillary's extra testicle and give it to the Supers? They seriously need to grow a pair!
May 29, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Politicians.
Not one of our higher lifeforms as a rule.
May 29, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it true that most politicians start out as lawyers?
May 29, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Yes.
Now take that agreement as you will.
May 29, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, a good number have been physicians like Bill Frist.
Lawyers, politicians, doctors -- three kinds of people with which you'll want to shake hands while keeping a tight grip on your wallet.
May 29, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
And magicians. And Christians.
I'm not kidding -
May 29, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets see add 19, kidnap 27, discount 23, hide 44, send 55 the wrong directions to Denver, yes her acid trip in delegate counting just might work,
NOT
May 29, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
lol
May 29, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please! Let's not give Looney Lanny any frickin' ideas!
May 29, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
It doesn't matter what happens on saturday or next week. Unfortunately, the clintons are taking this to the convention. They will find another bs excuse to drag this out hoping that some miracle will happen. Depressing.
May 29, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm thinking Pelosi will unsheath the silver dagger and drive it through her heart, once and for all.
May 29, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just don't buy it.
May 29, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hate to be a party pooper, but that's the way I see it. They should have bowed out in February if they weren't taking it to the convention. I fear that they are going all the way to August. They'll come up with some other victimization distortion and carry on. The issue will be if the media gives them any air time or if the media concentrates on the obama v. mccain battle.
May 29, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
This never-ending campaign makes my head do this....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY-03vYYAjA
May 29, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once SD and MT vote Super dels will fall like a brick of tons on the Clintons, hopefully.
By the way it's reasonable to assume if it were a contest race-it's more likely she would've gotten 6 del advantage than ninteen.
I can't wait for Clintons to be driven out to Timbuktu.
.
May 29, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
What exactly did timbuktu ever do to you?
like it or not the GOPers are stuck with Bush and we have the Clintons.
May 29, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
you're right. Sorry Timbuktu.
May 29, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you really think there is a chance that eventually we will reach that magic place where the name "Clinton" is not uttered or written about for o - 100 years maybe? Maybe? Please?
They've been in our faces and in the WH or running for it forever!
May 29, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, there will always be those times when I hit my thumb with a hammer and I'll say "Clinton! That was stupid!"
May 29, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well considering Ron Paul is still campaigning in the GOP primaries,
maybe we could tell them both they get to run in the NIT presidential election,
I just don't know where to tell the winner (by a 3 to 2 vote) exactly where NIT land is.
May 29, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, Tena, I was in the bathroom this morning, sitting on what I call "The Clinton", pondering that very same question.
May 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has already laid the groundwork to not accept the RBC ruling. All she and her surrogates are talking about anymore is full seating and all Michigan votes for her. Simple compromises are not enough - she needs full seating and all of Michigan of the primary is officially over as Obama passes the delegate finish line.
The only people who can end this now is Hillary super-delegates jumping to Obama and higher up supporters i.e. Bayh and Rendell telling her that it's over and that politically they can't let her tear apart the party with her drama because they need to get elected again themselves.
May 29, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is exactly what I think will happen if she keeps this shit up after next Tuesday.
May 29, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope that isn't what it takes. I could see Rendell doing what you suggest. Bayh, I don't know....
May 29, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rendell is already on the verge of doing just that.
Yesterday he said that it's "unlikely" Hillary will win.
May 29, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
YES!!
HRC has NO ethical standards.
No one will be able to talk her out of a fullfledged floorfight her and Bubba are just salivating over it...they LIKE this!!
May 29, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would the DNC want to enable Hillary any longer by giving in to her demands? she will use that to say again that she is more electable and make more and more trouble. The democrats are always too nice and polite, and that's why they lost to Bush in Florida last time. The Clintons, like the republicans, are nasty. Oh the horror.
May 29, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to know how many people have jumped off Clinton's sinking ship, such as myself, since she started all these tirades.
May 29, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Help me out here: why would anyone assume that Hillary won either Florida or Michigan? Because if I was in the Obama camp, I'd be arguing that Obama won both states by a huge margin, and I really don't think anyone would be able to provide a shred of credible evidence to the contrary.
May 29, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS: Read it, consider the source, and consider the ramifications:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/09/hillarys_brier_patch.html
May 29, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny! Reading that in retrospect.....
May 29, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. "lengthening her lead over Obama," and all that talk about the "inevitable nominee" makes the TPM headline about McCain leading Obama 44 to 40 in Michigan all the more ridiculous.
May 29, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and this quote from that article:
"Being forced to stay out of Florida and Michigan empowers Clinton's vastly superior name identification in the two high population states and overrules potential defeats in lower population Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. This poses a dilemma for Sen. Obama, Clinton's main challenger, that key supporters admit he cannot resolve."
is precisely why HRC should be penalized!! Any arguments that she makes should not even be considered until after she ACCEPTS that party rule.
But then her word means nothing.
May 29, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
My favorite line:
"She is measurably more popular in states where she has not campaigned than in primary states where she has....,"
Maybe she could've won the primary if she had just stayed home. It would've saved her a lot of money, too.
May 29, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two-step goal for Saturday:
1) follow excellent advise above to come up with a resolution that is best for the party, probably 50/50 or the should-be-the-same-but-isn't make each delegate .5 (Tho I still favor seating the pledged delegates and leaving the supers sitting out on the sidewalk....)
2) get the Clinton camp to state in very clear, unambiguous terms -- preferably in a written document -- precisely what they want, what their proposal is. Even if it's the ridiculous "100% of the MI vote goes to Hillary," get them to acknowledge that that is what they want.
What they want is, presumably, going to be what they would seek to get from a convention floor fight, if they decide to take it that far.
Then..... calculate how many SDs Obama will need to win even if Clinton got *everything* she was going to ask for from a floor fight and when he reaches that number, announce it from the rooftops and towers and mountains. Now, I don't think there is much limit to how foolish and divisive the Clintons are willing to be ..... but there is a limit, I think, on how ridiculous the Bayh's, and Rendells, and Rangels are going to be willing to appear. If they absolutely KNOW that she can't win and the public knows they know that, I think the fight will be over.
May 29, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing HRC signs is valid. If it were we would not be in this position as she signed a pledge to NOT do precisely what she IS doing.
What the DNC needs is an expulsion process for those candidates who do not follow DNC rules. Hillary needs to be sanctioned and shut down as well as Bill Clinton.
The DNC is going to have to grow a backbone and strip the Clintons of any power, tangible or intangible they possess.
Someone ELSE is going to have to step up and assume the mantel of leadership or the entire DNC is going to be sucked down into the vortex of the BILLandHill Clintons psycho drama ONCE more.
Hillary and Bill need to be DISENFRANCHISED from the DNC.
Shut her down, shut the campaign down, shut BILL down.
No signing SHYT...they will not honor it!!!
May 29, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain won't show for another important vote:
"While Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has made action on climate change a central theme in his campaign, he won't be on hand to vote next week when the Senate considers a landmark bill imposing mandatory limits on greenhouse gases."
--The Trail on the Washington Post
May 29, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
What - Mr. Tough Man McLame is too fucking chicken to face votes on two major issues?
Squawk! Squawk! Squawk!!
May 29, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty damning if you ask me...
May 29, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, McCain can't even work up to being 'present'?
May 29, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama responds to Clinton going to the convention:
"He shrugged off the prospect that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton could take her fight all the way to the convention, comparing his rival to previous also-rans who stuck it out until the end.
"This is true of every convention. I mean when Dukakis won the nomination you know Jesse was still running until the convention. When Bill Clinton was running, Jerry Brown was still technically in it. As far as I can tell this is fairly standard fare," Obama said."
--The Trail on WaPo
May 29, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fuuny?! More of a Tragicomedy I'd say.
May 29, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's 'Dramady'.
May 29, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or 'Comma'.
May 29, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama taking the day off? Hardly....
"At 7:45 this morning, Sen. Barack Obama will set vice presidential speculation on fire with a brief stop to say hello to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, himself an occasional presidential flirt. The meeting appeared on Bloomberg's schedule, which was distributed to reporters last night.
An Obama aide said the meeting was scheduled because of "mutual interest" and did not know whether the two had met before.
More coffee than ticket talk, though -- and Obama had better be brief. He's due to speak at the Democratic National Committee's winter meeting in Vienna, Virginia around noon.
Obama was in New York Thursday for a day of fundraisers, including a young professionals event at Harlem's historic Apollo theater. He also grabbed a burger or three at a local White Castle."
--Marc Ambinder, The Atlantic
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/11/obama_gets_his_morning_coffee.php
May 29, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
From 2007. Disregard. Fucking A, TPM, I've been trying to post this like seven times now!
May 29, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama does have a ceremony in Chicago on his schedule for today, howevs.
May 29, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's another good Altantic piece, Obama detailed his first 100 Days last night in a speech:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/the_big_domestic_policy_goal.php
This one IS from May 29, 2008.
May 29, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary, the PantSuit Pariah.
May 29, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or 'Comma'
May 29, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pretty sure that Rep. Rangel already switched to Obama some time ago.
May 29, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
This was actually a reply to Elizabeth2's comment of 12:55 PM today.
May 29, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, this feels like the longest week of my friggin' life.
May 29, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it will get to the convention. Pelosi and Reid will "encourage" other superdelegates to switch to Obama so that the FL and MI delegates won't matter at all. If they don't they will be risking not getting their earmarks for their territories. Such is the way of politics.
May 29, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Besides being consistant with the previously established DNC Rules, cutting the degates by 50% is exactly the same penalty that the Republicans imposed on MI and FL. This will take any GOP advantage off the table in the November election.
How can they appeal to "disenfranchised" voters when they treated GOP FL/MI voters the same way?
May 29, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama needs a HENCHMAN for this process.
He needs someone who will stand up to Bill Clinton and take him down. Bill is the power and if he is taken down this whole mess will be done.
Who has the cajones to take Bill down. I know Ted Kennedy did but he is ill and perhaps will not be able to wield his power as effectively due to his prognosis.
Who else can step up to the plate?
Who can chop BillandHill off at the knees. Who will be the James Baker for Obama?
Baker use to be a democrat do we need to call him?
May 29, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chill out. Obama doesn't need a henchman. He's been doing just fine on his own, and this thing will be all wrapped up in a week or two.
Start thinking about McCain, not Bill.
May 29, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
DaddyD
You perhaps need to review Clinton history if you think this is a time to chill. It isn't. The fight for this nomination has just begun. The Clintons are not going to concede anything. Nada. Zilch.
Obama is NOT doing fine. He is getting cremed in the press and the polls with all this continued talk from the Clintons about him being unelectable.
Obama canNOT take on the party himself, he needs a HENCHMAN to deal with the Clinton. If ordinary, gracious reasonable tactics worked Hillary would not still be campaigning. If ordinary reasonable pledges were binding Hillary would not be planning a floor fight on the convention floor. She is.
I suggest all you folks talking about chillin' better go get some fortified vitamins, coffee or ritalin because the Clintons are gearing up for a full fledged brawl.
Anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand how power works. The Clintons have it and WE have to TAKE it..they are not going to give it up.
Chill my ASS!!
I will chill after the nomination is sewn up for Obama and after he wins.
Until then it..it is time to TURN UP THE HEAT!!
This is not some nimby pimby waltz..it is a BATTLE and every single technique available to win fair and square needs to be implemented.
Now once AGAIN.
Who can step up and be Obama's HENCHMAN..he needs ONE!!
It is time to get down in the trenches and slug it out.
May 29, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
All I can say is: follow Obama's lead.
May 29, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you call that the first democracy in the world?
Allowing a candidate to shape the rules as she needs to make her case is part of democracy?
No question the DNC made a mistake. But since when is that Obama's fault?
May 29, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
She is so clintonian, yech!
May 29, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
All you people talking about chillin...
These are the kind of arguments that Obama's team needs to shut down:
"There is a difference between someone who could win and someone who will win," said Clinton senior strategist Howard Wolfson on a conference call with reporters earlier today. "That is an argument superdelegates can understand."
May 29, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wolfson is right about the two catagoies he is just mistaken about who belongs to which one.
May 29, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cauation>>>>> she's gonna go Lieberman on us.
May 29, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
pinkfloydfan001 ---
Charlie Rangel is still a Clinton superdelegate; it's his *wife* who has endorsed Obama (although she's not an SD, alas)
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html
He has, however, sounded quite fed up with some of Clinton's recent statements and actions and not been shy about saying so.
May 29, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink