You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #18: True, But even the FL & MI delegations will be split, so it's a wash [View All]

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
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-15-08 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. True, But even the FL & MI delegations will be split, so it's a wash
The supers (unpledged delegates) from Florida and Michigan won't be allowed a vote at all, and the pledged will be seated with half-votes. It's up to the campaigns in conjunction with a recommendation by the Rules Committee to offer to the Credentials Committee how to split the half-votes.

This is according to Rule 20.C.1.a.:

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.


(emphasis mine)

*****************************

Thanks for sharing the Rasmussen link! This does make sense:

But, in that scenario, the problems for Democrats would go far deeper. If Obama is denied the nomination, the collateral damage could reduce the number of House and Senate races that Democrats win this year. Why would any Superdelegate want to risk that?

So, for Senator Clinton, the challenge is not convincing Superdelegates that she’s more electable. Even if she could convince every single Superdelegate of that fact, it’s not enough. The standard now is much higher--Clinton also needs to convince Superdelegates that the party will stay unified behind her if Obama is denied the nomination. Unfortunately for Clinton at this time, that’s a question she cannot answer.


:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | 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