Even Clinton’s Nuclear Option Will Fail

phrigndumass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue May-13-08 05:24 PM
Original message

Even Clinton’s Nuclear Option Will Fail

Even Clinton’s Nuclear Option Will Fail

That’s quite a strong statement, isn’t it? How can I possibly claim that to be true? Even Clinton’s nuclear option will fail.

Well, you probably know by now how curious I can be. I had a different question in my mind nagging me today, and as I set out trying to answer it, I discovered an answer far beyond what my intentions were to find.

The original question: Regarding this primary, what’s the worst that could happen?

Of course, I’m speaking from the perspective of an Obama supporter. To me, “worst” would be a situation, any situation, where Senator Obama would not be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States. I needed to verify, for myself, the absolute worst-case-scenario for Senator Obama’s chances of becoming our party’s nominee.

Considering the DNC’s status quo, Senator Obama already has the nomination clinched. The only way to change that fact is to change the status quo, or as we refer to it, “move the goalposts.”

Michigan and Florida, the Final Frontier (or is it?)

Changing the status quo would require reversing the DNC’s prior decision not to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations. But changing the status quo is only the first part of Senator Clinton’s nuclear option, and it’s the only part of the nuclear option that has any logic applied to it. The remaining parts of the nuclear option consist of noisemaking, pitching fits, whining, complaining, protesting, and threatening to hold the party’s convention and election process hostage if the first part doesn’t put forth the results that the Clinton campaign is seeking.

A meeting of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee is scheduled for May 31 to discuss the predicament with the Florida and Michigan delegations. At issue will be whether the DNC followed its own guidelines set forth in the Official Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention when it ruled that none of the delegates from either Florida or Michigan will be seated at the National Convention in August.

The Clinton campaign will challenge the Committee to count at least half the delegations from Florida and Michigan by making reference to Rule 20.C.1.a. of the Delegate Selection Rules, under the heading of Challenges, which reads:

20.C.1.a. Violation of timing: In the event the Delegate Selection Plan of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating process to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules, or in the event a state holds such a meeting, caucus, convention or primary prior to or after such dates, the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent. In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation. In determining the actual number of delegates or alternates by which the state’s delegation is to be reduced, any fraction below .5 shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number, and any fraction of .5 or greater shall be rounded up to the next nearest whole number.

Why, you may ask, didn’t the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee follow the guidelines provided under this Rule in the first place? The answer is simple, yet tricky. This Rule applies to seating the delegations at the Convention only. During the process and before the National Convention actually begins, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee acts as the governing body for adhering to the process. If a state violates the Rules in any way, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee can certify non-compliance and remove the state from the process until the issue of non-compliance can be resolved. This is what happened with the Florida and Michigan delegations. They were simply removed from the process, pending resolution.

The Nuclear Argument

Given that the current status of Florida and Michigan is non-compliance, the Clinton campaign will first argue that both state primaries were conducted in a democratic manner and thus represent the actual intentions of the will of the voters in both states, and that no rules were violated. They may very well win on the first point, but not on the second, since the dates of the primaries were in violation of timing.

They would then argue that no compromise could be reached with the Obama campaign as to how to split the delegations, so the delegations should be seated as determined by the outcome of each state’s primary:

Florida:
Clinton – 105 pledged delegates
Obama – 67 pledged delegates
Edwards – 8 pledged delegates
Unpledged – 26 superdelegates

Michigan:
Clinton – 74 delegates
Uncommitted – 54 delegates
Unpledged – 28 superdelegates

The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will then, if they agree, make an official recommendation to the Credentials Committee that the pledged delegates be split in half and rounded for the National Convention pursuant to Rule 20.C.1.a. Thus, the delegations will be granted compliance status with these numbers:

Florida:
Clinton – 53 pledged delegates
Obama – 34 pledged delegates
Edwards – 4 pledged delegates
Unpledged* – 0 superdelegates*

Michigan:
Clinton – 37 pledged delegates
Uncommitted – 27 pledged delegates
Unpledged* - 0 superdelegates*

*From Rule 20.C.1.a.: ”In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation.”

With nothing going to Senator Obama in Michigan, this is the best that the Clinton Campaign could possibly hope for.

The new goalposts would be:
3,427 pledged delegates (half = 1,713.5)
795 superdelegates* (see above)
4,222 total delegates
2,112 delegates needed to nominate

Obama’s Got It Covered

Senator Obama currently has 1,594 pledged delegates and 285 superdelegates, totaling 1,879. Adding the DNC-approved totals from Florida and Michigan would give Senator Obama 1,628 pledged delegates and 285 superdelegates, totaling 1,913.

The new halfway mark of pledged delegates would be 1,713.5, and a majority would be 1,714. According to his current pledged delegate count and the polls for upcoming state contests, Senator Obama will still earn a majority of pledged delegates:

1,628 pledged delegates to date
9 pledged delegates from West Virginia
19 pledged delegates from Kentucky
30 pledged delegates from Oregon
24 pledged delegates from Puerto Rico
8 pledged delegates from Montana
9 pledged delegates from South Dakota
1,727 total pledged delegates (13 above half)

At this point, Senator Clinton’s nuclear option with everything decided in her favor has failed, since Senator Obama will still earn the majority of pledged delegates and win the endorsements of Pelosi Club superdelegates.

The Counter Argument

Back at the May 31 DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting, the Obama campaign will provide counter arguments that could result in rulings made to his advantage, making it easier for him to clinch the nomination in a nuclear scenario. Such arguments are:

- No candidates except Hillary Clinton were on the ballot in Michigan, thus making it impossible to determine the actual intentions of the will of the voters in that state. The Rules Committee could throw out all of the results from Michigan, or split the entire delegation between each candidate after penalizing the delegation by 50%.

And

- Michigan voters chose 27 uncommitted pledged delegates, and Senator Obama could argue that the actual intentions of the will of these voters were to vote for him.

Favorable rulings would only serve to boost Senator Obama’s nomination chances.

:dunce: