Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting on May 31st Determines

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:13 PM
Original message
What the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting on May 31st Determines
Edited on Wed May-28-08 12:31 PM by berni_mccoy
After reading the DNC legal analysis of what can/can not be achieved this coming Saturday (see: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/michigan-analysis/?resultpage=1& ), I learned a few things I had not known:

1. The DNC legal analysis does not mention Florida, either because it's challenge won't be considered or because the argument is the same (I do not know). It strictly covers the challenge to the RCB's December 3rd ruling against Michigan. The challenger of the decision is the Michigan Democratic Party.

2. The rules state that a minimum penalty for a state violating the calendar rules is a 50% reduction of pledged delegates and 100% reduction of SDs. The RCB has the authority to add additional penalties, which they did on December 3rd by sanctioning 100% of the pledged delegates. As such, they only have the authority to remove the RCB additional penalties. This means, the most favorable decision for Michigan is the seating of 128 pledged delegates at 1/2 their attributed value (or 64 total Michigan delegates).

3. If the RCB removes its additional penalties, it must determine how to proportion the restored delegates. There are three ways proposed:
A) as determined by the primary, non-Clinton delegates are free to chose (Clinton gets 36, Obama likely gets 28)
B) as determined by the primary, non-Clinton delegates are awarded to Obama (Clinton gets 36, Obama gets 28)
C) some other proportion (i.e. 50/50 split, based on new polling data, etc)

Let's assume the most favorable outcome for Clinton and she gets 36 additional delegates from Michigan and the new needed to win number becomes 2057.

Let's also assume that Clinton gets 2/3rd the delegates in Puerto Rico on June 1, giving her 36 and Obama 19.

Then on June 3rd Obama gets 49% of the remaining Pledged delegates: 15 to Clinton's 16.

This puts Obama at 2042, which is just 15 shy of the 2057 that would be needed. Clinton would have 1868, which would be 189 shy of the winning number. Given that there are 196 SDs remaining, she would need more than 96% of the remaining SDs to win. Obama would only need 7.6% of the remaining SDs to finish this.

Being overly fair to Clinton in the remaining contests and given the rate of SD announcements and the fact that Obama probably has at least 15 banked but undeclared, this contest will be over on June 3rd.

Unless, that is, Clinton seeks to destroy the party by taking it to the convention.

On Edit: Adjusted to consider Florida decision; if you throw in Florida the end result is 2110 needed to win with Obama having 2082 on June 3rd needing just 28 SDs to win with Clinton having 1920.5 needing 189.5 to win, an even bleaker outlook for Clinton.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. I believe she will never concede.
No matter what is decided by the courts...
No matter what is decided by the RBC...
No matter what is decided by our long-standing primary system...
No matter how many superdelegates switch over to Obama...

Because, you see, she is above all these things. They have no jurisdiction over her. She is ABOVE THE SYSTEM. The only thing that matters to HER is HER...
How much SHE wants this...
How hard SHE has worked...
How much humiliations SHE has had to go through...
How difficult admitting defeat is for HER...

Everything else to Hillary is just noise. Her intent is not to destroy the party, because that would mean she is focusing on something other than herself. No, her intent is to do anything and everything for HILLARY to win and if destroying the party happens to be a side-effect, she's ok with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. That is a rapidly growing consensus, unfortunately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoFlaJet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. facts, schmacts why are you trying to make her quit Berni?
she's in it to win it-this is very close, she has the popular vote, more than anyone EVER in the history of all elections all-time COMBINED!!! it's all about the swing states, latest polling indicates....Why Karl Rove's own map says....AHHHHHHH BLOOOOIEEE!!!!!as Terry McCauliffe's head explodes on national TV and DW-S's eyes finally pop right out of her head and Pat Buchanan breaks down and cries while giving a karate chop for emphasis
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. You mean she has the "schmopular vote", right? LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoFlaJet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. and a head
that doesn't even have to be modified for size to fit on Mt Rushmore-see that thread yet Berni?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Good post...recommended n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
7. That math is saucy! Ooey and Gooey! Cheddar.
Very good analysis of the rules, berni!

:kick: :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. High praise coming from you phrign! Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. Bottom line: Hillary will not get what she is demanding & her campaign hits a brick wall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDoorbellRang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. That bit about the super D's getting zip was a pleasant surprise
That's what many of us had been saying here all along, but didn't catch that part in the DNC rules originally. And here I had come up with what I considered a fair ruling, where I magnanimously granted the super D's a half vote each.:)

I liked the logic in this where they describe how to deal with the Uncommitted vote: leave the delegate selection of the Uncommitted up to the candidates who had removed their names from the ballot -- Obama, Edwards, Richardson, and Biden. All but Biden have endorsed Obama, so it would be up to Biden finally throwing his lot in with Obama or Clinton to really settle the MI kerfuffle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Agreed, and I don't think it would take much for Biden to confirm for Obama
at this point, it's becoming necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
11. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
13. You're mischaracterizing the memo
TPM only published the portion of the 38 page memo that was applicable to Michigan.

The R&BC will be addressing both Michigan and Florida.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I realized that and updated the OP. The math doesn't change
The argument is the same for FL. And I've added numbers to account for the ruling for FL as well.

It wasn't intentional and I did not mischaracterize anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. In the end, Hillary MIGHT end up with ~+20 delegates
Not enough to make any sort of a significant dent in his lead.

And ironically, she will probably win Puerto Rico while at the same time being mathematically eliminated from any possible win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC