IN and NC Democrats, please help avert an ugly controversy by way of Puerto Rico

[Dems to Win]

Indiana and North Carolina Democrats, your help is needed to avert an ugly controversy awaiting us in Puerto Rico. In the U.S. territory, citizens do not vote in presidential general elections, but they are given a voice in the Democratic primary.

Puerto Rico's Democratic party decided, on March 8 of this year, to hold a primary rather than a caucus to allocate it's 55 delegates. This decision was made after it became clear that in a close contest, the total popular vote -- no matter how skewed a figure, due to the mix of primary and caucus states -- would become an important number in discussions about the nomination. States that had already had their caucuses, in full accordance with the rules established before the primary season began, did not have the re-do option.

Colorado and Puerto Rico have been allocated the same number of pledged delegates, 55. With Puerto Rico holding a primary with an expected turnout of at least a million voters, its popular vote will likely equal the total caucus votes of Colorado PLUS the primary votes of South Carolina, New Hampshire, Delaware, and Utah, combined. Puerto Rico will thus have a popular vote equivalent vote strength of 160 pledged delegates, rather than their allocated 55.

If the perception is widespread that Obama won the delegate count but lost the popular vote, it will weaken our Democratic nominee and cause feelings of resentment among Clinton supporters. Our best hope of winning in the fall is with a strong nominee who was fairly chosen because he won the most pledged delegates and the most popular votes. The large popular vote expected for Clinton in Puerto Rico may make Obama fall short in the popular vote.

It is my expectation that Obama will end the primary season June 3 with a pledged delegate margin of about a hundred votes.

Shortly thereafter, I hope the DNC and Obama's campaign will announce they will recommend that the credentials committee seat the Florida and Michigan delegations selected at their state conventions, giving Clinton a 60 net delegate gain. Obama will continue to lead the total pledged delegate count by about 40 votes.

I think that a few hundred superdelegates will announce their commitment to vote for Obama at the convention. Obama will be the presumptive nominee, AND Michigan and Florida will have been counted in the total.

If the situations were reversed, and Clinton was ahead by any number of pledged delegates, she would be the nominee. To do anything else would leave her supporters feeling severely alienated and cheated. The Democrats won't do that to either side. Since Obama will almost certainly be in the lead, he will be the nominee. I hope that the Democrats can then unite around Obama, our nominee, and win in November.

If you've concluded, as I have, that our likely nominee, Senator Barack Obama, is worthy of your vote in the fall, I urge you to consider voting for him May 6. I think it is a wise move for everyone who hopes for a Democratic victory in the fall.

Even if Obama is not your first choice now, your vote in his column of the popular vote would be a gesture of hope for a Democratic victory in November. Doing so will help unite the Democratic Party and give us our best chance for a win in the general election.

As a California voter in June of 1992, I cast my vote not for Jerry Brown, my governor and favorite candidate, but instead for an inexperienced, charismatic governor of a small state, Bill Clinton. It was clear that he would be the nominee, and I wanted to add my little boost to strengthen him going into the convention and the fall election.

Thank you for your consideration.

[jackson_dem]

1. Why should PR be penalized for giving equal access to all its voters?

Maybe Colorado should consider doing the same so it won't have 5.5% turnout next time...

[FrenchieCat]

2. If the Puerto Rican people want to vote for a candidate that

has promoted racial divisions, simply to win an election....and considering that Puerto Ricans are descendants of both Spanish and African people mixed....and for them to have witnessed Bill Richardson, an Hispanic, being called a Judas by the Clinton camp, and still vote for Hillary Clinton; that would be as sad state of affairs for Puerto Ricans. I'm not sure how they could rationalize it. For them to affirm a candidate who, along with her back pocket corporate media, have taken race relations back like 30 years, would really make me question the mentality of those people of color who would support such. Just sayin'.

[Apollo11]

4. Carville's beef with Richardson has nothing to do with race.

I recognize that James Carville sometimes says stuff that sounds kinda crazy and I support Bill Richardson's right to endorse any candidate he wants to support. But Hillary Clinton is not responsible for what comes out of Carville's mouth, and there is no racial dimension to the "Judas" remark (something Carville said during the run-up to Easter - intended as a seasonal metaphor).

Just sayin' :eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

8. There was the fact that Team Hillary wanted Richardson to endorse

before Texas, specifically to help them out with the Latino vote. You don't remember?

and this?
---------------------

Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Hispanic expert, publicly articulated and Hillary agreed that this was an "historical Fact".

“The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.” —Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen
http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/index.php/2008/01/12/clinton-pollster-latinos-too-racist-to-vote-for-obama

Clinton at Root of Racist Stereotyping - Hispanics vs Blackswashingtonpost.com — Where did this come from? "Hispanics traditionally do not like Blacks." Since when? This is a racist, divisive falsehood that the Clinton Campaign has created and nurtured as a 'historical statement' in an attempt to pit the political arena against Obama. First mentioned by a Hillary pollster and then affirmed by Clinton herself. There is no proof.
http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Clinton_at_Root_of_Racist_Stereotyping_Hispanics_vs_Blacks

A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Hispanic expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter - and I want to say this very carefully - has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

The spin worked. For the last several weeks, it's been on the airwaves (Tucker Carlson, "Hardball," NPR), generally tossed off as if it were conventional wisdom. And it has shown up in sources as far afield as Agence France-Presse and the London Daily Telegraph, which wrote about a "voting bloc traditionally reluctant to support black candidates."

The spin also helped shape the analysis of the Jan. 19 Nevada caucus, in which Clinton won the support of Hispanic voters by a margin of better than 2 to 1. Forget the possibility that Nevada's Hispanic voters may have actually preferred Clinton or, at the very least, had a fondness for her husband; pundits embraced the idea that Hispanic voters simply didn't like the fact that her opponent was black.

But was Bendixen's blanket statement true?

Far from it, and the evidence is overwhelming enough to make you wonder why in the world the Clinton campaign would want to portray Hispanic voters as too unrelentingly racist to vote for Barack Obama.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=713782

[MonkeyFunk]

6. They shouldn't vote for the candidate

who's made race a huge issue. They should vote for Clinton, instead.

[ima_sinnic]

7. the only people who have made race an issue are the Clinton "supporters" who want to obsess about it

Obama has made it very clear he is running as a human being. and an American. It is the moronic mass media and its moronic viewers and especially the trolls who claim to be supporting Clinton but are instead just sowing seeds of divisiveness at the suggestion of the lardly Limbaugh who are interjecting race into the equation. I would like some links to comments by Obama that show he has "made race a huge issue."

And they should vote for Clinton only if their head is where hers is: up their @$$.

[JCMach1]

3. Jeesh, what part of democracy do you not understand!

Puerto Rico can choose its delegates in any manner it sees fit.

[FrenchieCat]

10. I saw a "please" in the title of the OP......

sounded like someone on a political forum board expressing their opinion.

Do you actually have a problem with that?

[Yossariant]

5. ANOTHER variation on the "Barack Obama Entitlement" theme.

:puke:

[FrenchieCat]

9. The only person who is still in the race simply because of

her feeling of entitlement is your Hillary candidate.

[dbmk]

11. It is perhaps rather..

.. a variation on the "Barack has won" theme. And the OP wants to send him in to the GE with the best possible backing from the party. One that the opposition can't play on.

If you don't think he has, fair game. But I think the OP laid out a reasonable argument as to why that he sees it so.

[leftofcool]

14. So, you don't believe in Democracy? That states decide how they vote?

[dbmk]

15. I certainly do.

And I do not see anything in the the OP stating that they shouldn't.
Changing the form after others have had theirs and based on development in the race can be debated though.

But in general it is definately their choice within the rules.

That does not change the fact that it is likewise the OPs right to advocate to the voters that they should vote to support what he, and many others, see as the established nominee.

[leftofcool]

13. Throw Democracy out the window so Bam Bam can "have" the election

[leftofcool]

12. Hello, Democracy..........get it?

[Dems to Win]

16. Yes, Puerto Rico votes will be fully counted, as they should be.

I think that it will be a very ugly and divisive conversation to have, about whether or not Puerto Ricans 'count', if Clinton's margin for claiming victory in the popular vote is the Puerto Rico vote.

True, it is a conversation we need to have, for justice for the people of PR and DC and other places. But do we need to attach that conversation to this nomination fight? Do we not have enough reasons to argue now?

My OP was an attempt to persuade voters. As we all have the right to do in a democracy.

P.S. Alert! Dems to Win is a female human being.

[grantcart]

17. This will be over in 2 weeks and we fortunately won't have to worry about PR

[rinsd]

18. Welcome to DU.

That was a nicely composed respectful argument.

You sure you're in the right place :evilgrin: