Myths and Facts about MI and FL delegates

Myth 1: MI and FL delegates don't matter.

Fact: If they didn't matter neither Obama or Hillary would campaign to seat them. They matter in the utmost sense of party unity. And they matter because they can be used as a power play in the event the convention is close.

Myth 2: MI and FL delegates can count toward the nomination.

Fact: This is impossible, DNC rules forbid them from being counted toward the nomination. All parties agreed on this.

Myth 3: Hillary wants the MI and FL delegates to count toward the nomination.

Fact: Hillary knows that this is impossible, she is merely calling for the democratic nominee to seat the delegates. An option both Dean and Pelosi said would be the likely outcome, and an option both Obama and Hillary agree is the right thing to do for party unity.

Myth 4: MI and FL won't be seated.

Fact: False. MI and FL would only not be seated if they were in a contested race, where it would flip the race one way or another. It was calculated that we're looking at a 50-60 delegate margin. A highly unlikely scenario. MI and FL will be seated in any realistic scenario.

Myth 5: Obama won't seat FL or MI.

Fact: Obama has stated today and over time that he supports the delegates of FL and MI, and that he will do all he can to have them seated. Thus he will seat them except in the event that by doing so he throws the majority of votes to Hillary Clinton. A highly unlikely scenario, but otherwise, his desire is to seat these delegates for party unity. This is the power play that I was talked about. The only scenario in which those states are not seated is if the margins are too close, Obama has the majority vote, and choses not to seat them (using his delegates at the convention to vote down any recommendations to seat the delegates). If the margins are out of contention, Obama has no reason not to seat the delegates, thus he will seat them.

Myth 6: MI shouldn't count because major candidates were not on the ballot.

Fact: At no point did the DNC tell the candidates to remove themselves from the ballot, by doing so they chose not to be represented in that state. Because 40% of MI voters were "uncommitted," at the DNC a move to vote can be tabled to restructure the delegate count for that 40% of uncommitted delegates.

Myth 7: MI and FL shouldn't count because candidates were not allowed to campaign there.

Fact: The state parties knew the punishment was severe for their breaking primary rules. Not being "allowed to campaign" does not preclude your local constituants from doing so. Because the delegates do not count toward the nomination it is a moot point.

:Kick:

But, uh, other than that....great post.

the primaries in Michigan and Florida?

It is my understanding that Edwards and Obama defined "participate in" as keeping your name on the ballot, so they successfully withdrew their names from Michigan ballot. They tried to withdraw from their names from the Florida ballot, but the deadline for this had passed by the time of the agreement.

It would appear the Hillary parsed the term "participate" in such a way as to permit her name to remain on the Michigan ballot and to tout the results in Florida. Did she sign the agreement with the full intention of "participating" (depending on your definition of the word) in Michigan and Florida or did she fully intend to comply with the agreement at the time and "political realities" change her mind later on? Who knows.

Should we seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida? Absolutely, but how you divide the delegates, I don't know. Do you use the results of primaries that all of the candidates refused to "participate" in? No. Can the states hold another primary (like South Carolina which held two primaries) or schedule caucuses for the spring?

The eventual Nominee may seat the delegates, but they will not decide the outcome.

I love how Obama supporters continue to reiterate the 50 point contested scenario that is so highly unlikely to occur that it's just a joke. The same scenario that would likely cause a brokered convention to occur.

But in terms of delegates towards the nomination, of course not.

Basically they did the math and agree with it with a few caveates. I don't have the actual math right here in front of me, but the thread is the one where I point out that the only way FL and MI aren't seated is if Obama choses not to seat them, toward the bottom.

were they to be seated. If not, no one would gain an advantage and a move to seat them would only be for party unity.

In fact number 2 you say that under no circumstance will the delegates be allowed to vote, even if seated.

Then, in fact number 4 you say that would NOT be seated if they were in a contested race where seating them would flip the race.

So which is it? If they are "seated" but can't vote (it's impossible under DNC rules) then why would it matter if its a close race or not? They are not "voting".

And if they can't cast their ballots for the nomination, why all the fuss to "seat" them?

The committee votes to have them seated and everyone agrees, or a candidate with the majority of the delegates votes to have them seated.

Look at it this way. FL and MI don't count toward voting for their own seating at the convention, but the other delegates can be used to vote for their being seated. The only way they don't get seated is if by voting for them to be seated they flip the race a different way.

This is from your post:
----------------------------
Myth 2: MI and FL delegates can count toward the nomination.

Fact: This is impossible, DNC rules forbid them from being counted toward the nomination. All parties agreed on this.
----------------------------

So what you are telling me is that if a majority of delegates (not including MI and FL) vote to have them seated, then they CAN vote on the nomination.

And what would the magic number be? 50%+1 of the delegates currently seated? So if Edwards delegates and Hillary delegates vote to seat FL and MI, then they can vote? And what of the undemocratic "super" delegates?

the Superdelegates can vote too.

is it 50%+1 of the currently seated delegates? (That's my guess) or is it 50%+1 of the total authorized delegates (which would include MI and FL, even though they cannot vote on this matter)?

The 50%+1 of the currently seated delegates is a smaller number. One that she might be able to swing with her delegates and, say, the superdelegates (who, as I understand it, even if they support one candidate or another, can vote on anything any damn way they want to)... so, a promise here and a perk there... and she gets these ill-gotten and uncontested delegates seated, which will allow her to win the nomination while certain superdelegates vote for Edwards or Obama thereby keeping promises they made while allowing Hillary to have the nomination (and them their perks and political payoffs).

Think it can't happen?

I never thought I'd see one union file a lawsuit to see members of another union not to be allowed to vote as per an in place agreement either.

A brokered convention is really the only outcome of a contested primary. Release the delegates, let them play ball, neither candidate is getting that nomination, that's for damn sure.

The scenario being that Obama would vote them into contention giving the nomination to Hillary. It's unlikely to occur and is the one scenario where they would not be seated.

Edwards is a lone dog in this race, in this scenario, he could go with Obama, not seat the candidates, or Hillary, and seat them.

But again you're invoking this incredibly unlikely scenario that everyone around here fucking focuses on that is just a joke. It's people people WANT a Bush 2000 fiasco. It's as if people WANT a brokered convention.

The credentials committee recommends to the convention whether disputed delegates will be seated. The convention votes on the recommendation..... Anything can happen.

THAT's a fact.

But doesn't the minority report play a role here, too, in the event that they vote no?

The final action has to be taken with a floor vote. There's no guarantee that anyone's delegates are required to vote the way the candidate wants on this issue. They could theoretically vote their conscience -- either yay or nay. Few of the posters at DU seem to understand the process or have even been to a convention, much less sat on one of the committees there.

The credentials committee has been (in the last decade or so) one of the least sought-after positions in the process. Most of the time it's a dead bore. This one will be interesting. :)

the table for the INCOMING, yet to be selected rules, and credentials committees.

:hi:

Wish I was more articulate.

Pinch the fleshy part of your hand between your index finger and your thumb. Try both hands. On one or the other there will be a sore area. Put pressure on it for five seconds and release. Do it a few times. Headache will get better. Honest!

BTW - Did you get my PM about that Clinton - Obama video at Cspan?

My short term memory is toast. :D