I am absolutely TERRIFIED of what the rules committee will do on May 31-Should I be?

[Obamamaniac_25]

I just headed on over to MSNBC.com. The first thing I do in the morning is read first read. So, what happens? I click on MSNBC's politics section and see an article that Senator Clinton has powerful friends on the rules committee that will "bolster" her case, i.e., seat Michigan and Florida as is and screw all of us who voted for Obama.

Here's the link;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24638124

Specifically:
The panel, the Rules and Bylaws Committee, is to meet on May 31 in Washington and could determine the nominating process, or at least heavily influence it. What the committee will do is a major question mark before the last primaries on June 3.

Among the 30 panel members, 13 have declared support for Mrs. Clinton and 8 have declared for Senator Barack Obama. Seven others are neutral or have not declared, although some of their fellow members perceive at least four as leaning toward Mr. Obama. The co-chairmen have not endorsed anyone.

The article goes on to say that if the rules committee seats MI/FL, then Senator Clinton will lead in the so-called "popular vote" and use that to try to win the nomination.

This is frightening. I think the rules committee is the last major challenge to Senator Obama and they seem poised to try to stop him. I feel so helpless after reading this.

[BklynChick]

1. I believe they will seat the delegates, or half the delegates or find some equitably way to seat

them but they will not count the popular vote.

[Obamamaniac_25]

2. I hope so

Note the NYT saying that this committee will decide the nomination or at least have a large part in it as well. It will bloody "DECIDE" the nomination? I am tripping out.

[BklynChick]

5. I think everyone knows and agrees that Obama has won this thing, and that FL and MI have to be

punished without totally disenfranshing them. I think a compromise would be to seat half the delegates but the popular vote isn't included in the total. Everything I've heard and read so far makes me think this.

[Obamamaniac_25]

8. OK-that makes me feel better-n/t

[sfaprog]

3. It's very hypocritical for Hillary to talk about disenfranchising voters of FL and MI

yet out the other side of her mouth push this make-believe "popular vote" which disenfranchises caucus states.

[Texas Hill Country]

11. HAHA, thats funny cause caucus states are inherently disenfranchising!

[jsmirman]

13. But what's really funny is that this arrangement is part of long agreed to and accepted party rules

where she wants to make up rules as she goes along and to suit her. That's just hilarious!

[sfaprog]

23. I actually agree. However...

until we get rid of them, they are the rules. They are how a state determines who its delegates are, and delegates are how we determine who the nominee is, not this made-up "popular vote" which hilariously ignores the difference between caucuses and primaries.

[jsmirman]

12. Her claiming these illegitimate results should be seated is like bringing monopoly $ to an auction

and then claiming that you aren't threatening the value of real dollars.

[Bill McBlueState]

4. Don't worry about it

Obama's pledged delegate lead is getting big enough that it doesn't matter what they do with the MI and FL delegates.

As for the popular vote, the SDs are smart people. They'll make their own decisions about what to consider. A committee ruling on Michigan and Florida isn't going to force them to look at things differently.

[Obamamaniac_25]

6. And fortunately Obama can appeal this to the credentials commitee

Hopefully he doesn't hesitate to do so.

[WeDidIt]

7. Don't be

The pledged delegates in each will be seated at half strength based upon the primaries. The Edwards delegates in Florida go for Obama and it breaks about 50-50 for clinton and Obama.

In Michigan, they'll throw Clinton a bone and Obama will get teh uncommitted delegates.

End result, no change except for the number needed to win, but Obama will be at the new number already any way.

The members of that committee are first and foremost Democrats, and they are not about to overturn what has already been decided.

[TexasObserver]

9. Politicians are survivors and no one wants to go down with the USS Hillary

Her ship is taking water and sinking. No one who wants to have a future in the party will jump on her sinking ship.

I don't know what the result will be, but it will include a penalty for violating the rules, and they will lose perhaps half their delegates.

[flor de jasmim]

10. As Donna Brazile said, 48 states FOLLOWED THE RULES

[Romulox]

14. A mere coincidence that those rules favored her guy.

Donna Brazile, the DNC "neutral"... :rofl:

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. Actually, the rules (which everybody agreed to) favor anybody

who follows the rules.

[Romulox]

16. And circular logic makes a lot of sense (or else why would it have the word "logic" in its name???)

:rofl:

[ieoeja]

17. He wins even if they are counted fully.

And there is no way the RBC is going to count them fully. They will probably use the automatic punishment: elected delegates ballots count one-half; super delegates count zero.

Actually, their super delegates are not even allowed at the convention under the automatic punishment. But they'll probably let them in the door. Just not let them vote.

Unless, of course, the Florida supers keep talking trash and threaten to disrupt on the convention floor. Which they probably will. In that case they will probably stick to the original punishment and leave those supers out in the cold.

Unfortunately, Michigan supers, who have not been the raving maniacs like the Florida supers, would likely have to share in that punishment. But as I said, *they* are not behaving like raving maniacs. They seem to understand where the true fault lies.

[Orangepeel]

18. The "popular vote" with or without FL and MI is meaningless anyway

People in Florida and Michigan did vote for Clinton, so a count of people who voted for her might as well include them. However, it is no more meaningful than, say, the current polls in California that show Obama would get more votes if the primary were held today. It's just not the way the nominee is selected.

If superdelegates want to consider that, they are able to. I don't think they will because it would be damn stupid both for the future party as a whole and their own re-election chances if superdelegates voted in a way that gave the nomination to someone with less elected delegates.

[high density]

19. Popular vote disenfranchises caucus states

If we were going to use popular vote to select a nominee then the rules should've said that to begin with.

[DemVet]

20. "seat Michigan and Florida as is and screw all of us who voted for Obama"

Works for me.

:toast:

:beer:

[billyoc]

21. No. nt

[BlooInBloo]

22. Nope.

[sybylla]

24. They won't seat them in a way that goes contrary to the original rules

My guess is that, if they seat them at all, they will seat them with a 50-50 split so that they have zero affect on the nominating process.

The SD's from Florida may not be seated at all or may not be allowed nominating votes since they are by and large the party leadership who supported the idea of a primary date change. I would hope to see some form of punishment directed straight at them.

[housewolf]

25. The rules committee members are the ones who made the FL/MI rules in the first place

I think they aim to resolve the issue in a way that a does not over-turn their own rules. I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with some new creative idea that no one has talked about yet on May 31.

Hillary's argument about the popular vote is nothing more than a political talking point aimed at making her to be more of a "candidate of the people" than Obama is. She's only "won" the popular vote if all of the votes from the caucus states are NOT counted (where she never planned to compete... isn't there just a bit of hypocrisy there??). In any other measure of counting the popular vote, including counting all of MI & FL, Obama has more popular votes. In regards to her demographic arguments, polls show that in any match-up with McCain, Obama & Hillary pull exactly the same percentages by demographic factor.

I am certain that the rules committee does not want to self-destruct the party or alienate vast numbers of voters.

It's only a few more days, and we'll see.


There was a good article today re: Hillary's arguments, see this post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5982931

Hillary's popular vote argument is basically an argument to throw out the original rules and create new ones that favor her. I don't think the rules committee will do that. According to the rules, primary elections are about selecting delegates who select a nominee, not a popularity contest. The general election is a popularity contest, the primary elections are not.

[pompano]

26. Obama will....

be the Democratic nominee. The more doubt Hillary throws in the pot of stew is the more time we spend fretting and not enjoying the moment. She is spiteful. If she can't win it then she doesn't want anyone else to enjoy the moment. We generally see this behavior from a 3rd grader on a playground. And, I must admit, I am shocked to see it from a 2 time First Lady and US Senator, but she is who she is.

The best thing to do, and I should take my own advice, I-G-N-O-R-E her. She acts out and says outrageous things for attention. She does not carry the clout to have Washington wrestle away the will of the people of 48 States just so she can get her way.

If you still have your best bottle of wine corked, what are you waiting on? Your nominee has been set. Bottoms up! :toast:

Don't let her spoil your party and historic moment in time.

[TexanDem]

27. Didn't they calculate numbers that even w/ all MI &FL, she still couldn't win? Not sure.