Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's REAL Magic Number is 94.5 and Needs 2147.5 Delegates Total

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
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:28 PM
Original message
Obama's REAL Magic Number is 94.5 and Needs 2147.5 Delegates Total
Harold Ickes in the RBC meeting, and the Clinton campaign a few minutes after that meeting closed, signaled loud and clear they do not accept the 59 delegates awarded to Obama from Michigan as legitimate.

You can argue whatever you want to argue about that stance, but that is where we are. They are not going to concede on any number that includes those 59 delegates with a half vote each. They have moved the goal posts and will take it to the convention under any circumstances that does not achieve this requirement

So here's where we are. Obama will not secure the nomination prior to the convention without reaching a total delegate count they would find legitimate.

That number is now 2147.5 for Obama and 2118 for Clinton. That's how it is. They are holding the conventino, the nomination, and the white house hostage over this.

The saddest bit about the whole thing is it's ben reported that the vast majority of remaining super delegates don't want to endorse until Clinton concedes.

We're in Catch-22 territory now.

Sadly, we are screwed unless a good lot of Super Delegates who have showed no spine to this point suddenly grow a spine and endorse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tokenlib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Barack will get to that number--on the 4th if not before...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lisa58 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. so what?
...Ickes is using a lawyers trick and it won't work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. They'd Take It To The Convention No Matter What
They're working for 2012 - to destroy Obama, and build a base of Archie Bunkers and Geraldine Ferraros. They want to keep working at that as long as they can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
24. 2012? I don't know about you but I expect Obama to have 8 years
in office just like her bill did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. They're Trying To Get McSame Elected
Edited on Sat May-31-08 08:05 PM by MannyGoldstein
They figure he'll be a great target in 2012. But to get McBush elected, they need to destroy Obama - hence the current garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #26
31. They must think we in the Democratic Party have very short memories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. You forget Pelosi and Reed. They can cause serious damage to..
house and senate members who don't select. Moreso, they WILL cause serious damage to those who hold out. I wouldn't be at all surprised if phone calls went out to the DNC members still uncommitted that their future prospects in the party will be in jeaprody if they don't select someone soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. It's 2,118. Don't let them pull your leg.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. That's the official number
but he has to shut down any possibility of it going to the convention because contentious conventions are always losers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Even if it were 94.5, we've got it in the bag, for certain
Check out this post to see where 67 of your 94.5 delegates will come from:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6203020

Besides those 67, I'm sure at least 25 elected superdelegates will endorse Obama in the next few days. It's imminent.

Nothing to worry about. It's in the bag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. I'm hoping it happens by Wednesday night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RNdaSilva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. It is 2118...
Edited on Sat May-31-08 08:14 PM by RNdaSilva
and it is not going to change. Forgot, is 2117 a possibility? Who cares?

It is over. Relax!

Tuesday night, or Wednesday morning, Senator Obama will be the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party. He will more than likely announce it Tuesday night in the Republican's back yard...the home of their convention.

It will not go to the credential's committee nor to the convention. If so...meaningless.

Ickes is yesterday's news...tomorrow.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecdab Donating Member (834 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
7. Don't play follow the goal posts with Hillary - it's a waste of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gore1FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
8. The DNC ruling favored Clinton
And they are still complaining... Imagine that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
9. I don't take my marching orders from Ickes! But thank you
for giving the Cult of Hillary ideas! Noble of you! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. The point being
Once he reaches 2147.5, they have no argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. If thre Clintons not having an argument is your goal, you will never reach it. They will simply
modify, or come up with a new argument.

The will decide not to recognize Minnesota, or Wisconsin or whatever.

You seem to be under the illusion that the Clintons are playing ethically. They aren't. They believe achieving power, by any means

is the only imperative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
10. The opposition doesn't have to condede. It's been decided. They can appeal....
and they have reserved the right to do so. But it won't change anything, it looks like.

BTW...the end # is 2118, I think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elidor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
11. Was I hallucinating earlier today?
When I thought Bill Clinton said that Hillary would accept the decision of the RBC? Because I really thought I read that story. Someone tell me I'm not just totally fucking crazy here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. I think they decided to let Bill be the liar on this one
One of them had to be a liar about it, and it's so much easier sending Bill out to lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blonndee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. "They decided?" Bill IS a liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
housewolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
34. I think that was specific to the Florida compromise
They have been pretty adamant about not giving Obama any MI delegates lately.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elidor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. Ah. Thanks for clearing that up
I spent fifteen minutes looking for it, but couldn't find it. The board is moving very fast today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
13. your 100% wrong. The number is 2117 and Obama is now 64
no Catch - 22.

If Hillary persues a delegate challenge at the convention she will be laughed out of the convention.

Ickes can reserve all of the rights he wants but the fact is those rights are held by the Michigan State Democratic Party and if they are happy with the resolution - and they are - there will be no challenge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
27. I think you have a good point there - states have the right to appeal
at the convention but I am not sure that a candidate can appeal for a state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. no a delegate from that state would have to put together a minority
proposal that would have to show that it had popular support from his/her home state, or why would the committe bother with it.

I am sure that Hillary could get one of her delegates to jump the shark but the nail was Florida. When they decided unanamously to agree then it left it a single state challenge.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4themind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
16. I think it's just to give the appearnce of a fight to keep puerto rico in play IMO
Edited on Sat May-31-08 07:53 PM by 4themind
That's their last big hope to go ahead in the popular vote even if MI is left out. I think by next friday he'll have the delegates he needs even if it's 94.5 Ultimately they can either lose now , and salvage career jobs within obama's administration and face relatively reduced enmity in their attempts to get them elsewhere; Or they can lose at the convention and risked being ostracized by the majority of the party, and graver threats to their political futures. At that point it could be reliably said that hillary did EVERY thing to take down obama, that's quite a different animal than leaving after the last official voting, which a large group of super dels are also willing to do. And I think those different situations will result in different consequences.

It's really going to come down to whether they can realistically asses their own self-interest using risk analysis because if they can I think they will bow out. Ickes will be finished if he's seen as ruining TWO presidential elections(carters as well), he has a family and a life to live as well,and loyalty seems to be a one way street with the clintons, he may have to look after himself at SOME point. If he doesn't he will deserve his own demise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
17. Why should Obama get MI delegates?
He wasn't on the ballot. That was his choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlaGranny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. ....
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. By all rights, MI should have ZERO delegates
They broke the rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
29. He wasn't on the ballot because of a deal that Hillary agreed with
until she started to lose. I the rule had not been made in the first place he would have been. Him and others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BearSquirrel2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #17
30. It was Harold Ickes choice to strip 100% of delegates from Michigan ...

Why should Ickes be concerned about vote allotment in a state where he voted to remove their representation completely. The proposal was made by the state party and accepted by the committee overturning Ickes (and by proxie Clinton's) vote to have ZERO representation from Michigan.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
housewolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
36. Because the MI state Democratic Party was able to agree that it was a fair allocation of delegates
That's the reason why. It was their proposal that the DNC adopted. It's what the state party agreed to do.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichardRay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #17
38. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis a nunc et massa volutpat malesuada. Sed ac elit. Nam placerat risus viverra nunc. Maecenas iaculis lectus. Quisque ullamcorper. Vivamus lorem orci, consectetuer a, viverra luctus, imperdiet id, ligula. Curabitur rutrum. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Praesent aliquet dictum metus. Maecenas odio lorem, dignissim eget, pulvinar ut, volutpat in, dui. Fusce scelerisque rutrum sapien. Nunc ut neque. Suspendisse malesuada libero in purus. Vestibulum id sapien a augue placerat ornare. Donec id justo. Nulla sem. Integer vestibulum ligula. Cras elit lorem, vehicula ut, volutpat laoreet, adipiscing sit amet, neque.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
housewolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
23. You seem to operating on the assumption that the Clinton campaign controls the DNC
including the Rules Committee and the Credentials committee at the convention... and I just don't think that's so at this point


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
28. It's over. The goalposts have been cast in cement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RNdaSilva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. Or,
Edited on Sat May-31-08 08:32 PM by RNdaSilva
returned to their original location. A position of hopelessness.

The field grew from 100 yards to 200 yards and back to the legal 100 yards. However, team Obama is now 1st and goal with a fraction of an inch to go. Calling a QB sneak against a weak D.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PretzelWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
35. I just hope nothing like happened to RFK happens to Hillary
it would be terrible for her and the party.
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 Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:58 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