Michigan and Florida will be seated.

[FlyingSquirrel]

There will be some type of penalty. The two states will be counted, in a proportional way that reflects the original vote in those two states. However the candidates who followed the rules (and who, in the case of MI, were not on the ballot) will not be penalized for doing what they felt was the right way to support the DNC's sanctions.

There is no way the Democratic Party can afford to completely disenfranchise voters in MI and FL in the nomination process.

This we all know. So I really don't see what the big ruckus is about. They'll probably strip them each of half their delegates and superdelegates, give the Uncommitted delegates to Obama in MI, (or perhaps 80% of the Uncommitted delegates, with the rest choosing at the Convention). It is just gonna involve a lot of wrangling for this final solution to come about.

When it's all said and done, Clinton will gain about 32 delegates and 5-6 superdelegates.

Even if they were all seated as-is with Obama getting all the Uncommitted in MI, Clinton would gain 56 delegates and 11 superdelegates. DemConWatch shows totals of Clinton with 1688 and Obama with 1685 including MI/FL, but NOT including 55 uncommitted in MI. Add that in and Obama currently leads 1740 to 1688.

If you give Clinton and Obama each 50% of the remaining 613 pledged delegates (including some from states that have already voted but not assigned delegates) their totals would be:

Obama 2,046.5, Clinton 1,994.5 (again, if MI and FL were counted as-is).

Obama would then need 162 of the remaining 374 supers to win, or 43.3% of them.
Clinton would need 214 of the remaining 374 supers to win, or 57.2% of them.

Michigan and Florida are not enough to give this race to Hillary now. The superdelegates would not overturn the popular vote and delegate lead. Hillary still has to take MORE than 54% of the remaining PD's to catch Obama if you include MI and FL. She then has to win over 50% of the uncommitted superdelegates.

It doesn't look probable to me, especially when they've made it clear there will be some kind of penalty for MI and FL, which undoubtedly must involve a reduction in their delegates (what other penalty could there possibly be?)

[DURHAM D]

1. I thought the DNC canceled their rooms in Denver.

What are they going to do - put Michigan and Florida delegates in a tent city?

Actually, that would be interesting.

[FlyingSquirrel]

2. They'll figure out something I'm sure. For the 160 or so that

will be seated. Some of the hotel rooms might get a bit cramped with people sleeping on the floor in sleeping bags.

:)

[Hawkeye-X]

4. They are more than welcome to sleep in my backyard

They need to deal with the squirrels who currently reside there.

[stahbrett]

3. I agree that they'll be seated, but not until AFTER Hillary concedes the nomination

Then, and only then, should they be seated. Make it clear that, even though they wouldn't actually swing the lead in the pledged delegates race, that Michigan and Florida will not play a role in choosing the nominee, while still giving them seats at the convention.

[olkaz]

5. "When it's all said and done, Clinton will gain about 32 delegates and 5-6 superdelegates."

Where the hell are you getting this?

Are you just making it up?

[FlyingSquirrel]

21. That was deductive math

She has a lead of 56 PD's and 11 SD's in FL and MI, assuming you give Obama the Uncommitted vote in MI. So if they penalize them each half their delegates, half of that would be 28 and 5-6, but if they were to assign only 80% of the uncommitteds in MI to Obama it would translate to a 32 delegate lead.

It's all speculation of course anyway. But I'm assuming as most are that they can not afford to completely disenfranchise MI and FL, so penalizing them half their delegates is the most reasonably likely outcome.

[Indenturedebtor]

6. Source?

Where is the article/source please?

[FlyingSquirrel]

22. It's my opinion.

Source for numbers is DemConWatch.

[RBInMaine]

7. Who says Obama is "suing" in MI??

I have seen posts claiming Obama is suing in MI?? None of the news outlets I have seen are saying anything like that. In fact, they are saying that the re-vote problems are mainly due to lack of support WITHIN Florida and Michigan. For example, in Florida they are saying are saying that an appropriate election format can not be found, and in MI the legislature is not finding the 2/3 vote needed to pass a
re-vote. I know that Obama has said he'd accept a plan that was FAIR and accepted by the DNC. Hillary is foolish enough to want to seat all the MI and FL delegates as voted origninally even though there were no campaigns and Obama wasn't even on the MI ballot. THAT IS INSANE ! However, FL is now talking about a compromise to seat their original delegates with half seated according to the original vote and the rest according to another proportional scheme. I am sure in the end fair compromises will be reached to get those delegates seated. Just relax folks, and let the process have a chance to play out. There is plenty of time.

[FlyingSquirrel]

23. I haven't seen that. If they didn't give a link then it's not worth discussing

[AZ Criminal JD]

8. Your solution can't be done.

You can't just "give" delegates to Obama or anyone else. It is a violation of Michigan and Florida election law. This is one of the problems they ran into in trying to have a 'do-over'. Also it would be a violation of DNC rules although that would be easier to change.

[kstewart33]

9. They'll be seated but in a way that's fair to both candidates.

At least, that's what should happen. Hillary has no claim to the delegates in Michigan given that Obama's name was not on the ballot, so that favors an even split.

In Florida, she should gain a few. But not enough to make any difference in the eventual outcome.

[saracat]

10. Uncommitted go to Obama? Why ? What about Edwards voters? And other?What about those that don't

support Obama? Tthere is no reason to suppose those voters would have gone to Obama.

[OzarkDem]

12. All the more reason

why they will definitely need more than 1 round of balloting.

IIRC, delegates are pledged to a candidate only on the first round of balloting. After that they can vote make their own choice.

I'm actually looking forward to this convention, it should be interesting.

[Johnny__Motown]

17. The OP assumes that it would be part of "the deal", not unreasonable. In Iowa many Edwards

delegates went to Obama, not all but most.

[WilyWondr]

11. Have any recall elections been called for

in FL or in MI?

That is the way you go about removing your representatives if they are not representing you. I have heard of no one calling for a recall election, have you?

The people of FL and MI got what they deserved. If they did not want the primary changed they could have contacted their reps last year when this was being done. Did all of you whiners contact your reps last year? What did they tell you?

The reason none of them were whining last year about this was because HRC was the presumptive nominee and FL and MI wanted to get their primaries in before the primary was over on 2-5-08..........they didn't care about the delegates not getting seated because they didn't think it would matter.

:rofl:

[TwilightGardener]

13. This is what happens when you break the rules--you don't reward the rule-breakers--

fuck 'em. I don't care if MI and FL Democrats are retarded enough to vote for McCain out of revenge. Let 'em, and they'll get what they deserve.

[ecstatic]

14. I just don't get Dean on this one. How did they not see this coming?

He was right about the war so I trust his judgment, but how could the DNC be so cocky as to think they could get away with not seating Fl and MI? :crazy: I saw this coming a mile away, and was very vocal about it prior to Iowa's caucus in January.

I view this situation like I do the war: It shouldn't have happened in the first place, but now that it has, there is little that can be done to make sure any re-dos are fair, accurate, and affordable.

[TwilightGardener]

15. Well, why did they move up their primaries then?

[ecstatic]

18. You have to admit--this current situation is unprecedented

Nobody expected the primaries to drag out this long---we thought Iowa and NH would once again call all the shots and determine the race.

For that reason, I supported the desires of certain states to have more of a say because I really don't view IA or NH as diverse, progressive electorates. I still feel that way, despite the way the votes turned out.

[madfloridian]

16. He has always said they should be "seated"....just adjust the delegate count.

Maybe you have not been paying attention. He is not the bad guy. The states rebelled, lawsuits were filed, and so on.

[ecstatic]

19. True, but will they be seated arbitrarily or based on what

the voters say?

[newborn]

20. Good move by the DNC

This is a very plausible move, as Florida and Michigan voters were upset at the prospect of having their votes ignored.
Kudos.

[ORDem]

24. And you know all this, ... how?? n/t