A Parliamentarianish Question: What If the Michigan and Florida Delegations...

[CorpGovActivist]

... announced ahead of Denver that they are boycotting the convention, against a backdrop of no clear winner without their delegations' votes?

:popcorn: AND :beer:

"Well, if the Rules Committee of the DNC would like to issue a public apology, and if the DNC would like to pay for the cost of a special election in each of our states, we'd be happy to join you in Denver later this year."

One can dream of the Rules Committee Commissars getting their due come-uppance.

- Dave

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

1. You imply that "no clear winner" is a bad thing

It would make for an entertaining and informative convention.

Maybe even a "draft Gore" movement.

I gotta get me some of that popcorn ...

:hi:

[CorpGovActivist]

2. Oh, Please Don't Misunderstand...

... I'd chain pop NoDoze to watch.

- Dave

[Gman]

3. The rules of the party essentially say

the convention is made up of all the delegates alloted per state minus those not seated. The candidate that gets a majority of those seated gets the nomination.

I was on the Temporary Rules Committee for the 2004 convention.

[CorpGovActivist]

4. But What If the Delegations Banded Together...

... and refused to send anyone?

It's a far-fetched hypothetical, to be sure.

- Dave

[Gman]

17. That's not going to happen

for the simple reason that the delegates are not being seated because they violated the rules. All the other states sending delegations played by those rules.

But just as I responded below, ultimately the convention could vote to seat MI and FL. The convention is the ultimate authority on all matters.

[NoPasaran]

11. Gman, would you expect

Would you expect those delegations to make a case to the Credentials Committee to be seated anyway?

[Gman]

16. Would I expect them to appeal to the Credentials Committee?

Yeah, I do expect it. I also expect the Credentials Committee to vote to not seat them. The issue can always be appealed to the full convention. The full convention has the final say-so. Of course, they could also look at the make-up of the Credentials Committee and even the convention, see who (what group(s)) is/are controlling the committee and/or convention and be able to decide if there are enough votes to prevail or not. That is usually the first question asked: Can we win it?

The convention wheeling and dealing could potentially be a sight to see. My favorite kind of politics is convention politics.

[CorpGovActivist]

18. Bookmarked for Later, Thanks! n/t

[NoPasaran]

19. I love a good floor fight!

I hope something entertaining happens.

[madfloridian]

5. What if FL and MI realized they are not the only ones on the planet?

And that they are no more or no less important than the other states?

[CorpGovActivist]

6. I Applaud Them for Challenging the NH/IA Hammerlock...

... it's not written into the Constitution.

- Dave

[madfloridian]

7. at the risk of losing the election.

I do not applaud breaking rules just to sound tough and be big stuff.

[CorpGovActivist]

8. It's a Primary, Not a Politburo Brunch

[madfloridian]

9. Long term ramifications.

It was a power play disguised.

[CorpGovActivist]

10. Yup, a Game of Chicken between the Rules Commissars and the States...

... the Politburo won, and we all lost.

I'm loving all the coverage that Dems are getting today out of Michigan.

:sarcasm:

- Dave

[madfloridian]

12. No, that is not who won.

There were no winners when rules or broken and lies are told. It does mean advantage Clinton.

[CorpGovActivist]

13. When the Process Is So Rigid That the Only Viable Option...

... is to buck the rules, then the rules need re-writing.

- Dave

[RB TexLa]

14. What if Iowa and New Hampshire realized that?

[CorpGovActivist]

15. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." -- JFK