April 29, 2008

Hmmm...: Michigan Dems Ponder Splitting Delegates 65-59 For Clinton
— Ace

Kind of a false democracy where no one really votes but their "votes" are counted anyway, according to how Democratic bigs figure the public would have voted.

Clinton has argued that she should get 73 delegates based on the results of the Jan. 15 primary, which she won — 18 more than Obama.

Obama, who removed his name from the ballot, wants the 128 pledged delegates split evenly, 64-64.

The compromise, suggested Tuesday in a letter to Michigan Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer, fell halfway between the two proposals.


Still, it's probably close enough. And it would give Our Girl another six delegates. And she a-gonna need 'em.


Posted by: Ace at 03:56 PM | Comments (55)
Post contains 125 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Um, is that math right?

Posted by: runninrebel at April 29, 2008 04:00 PM (Qljnf)

2 I ate the other 4 delegates.

Posted by: Joanie at April 29, 2008 04:06 PM (Yyy1m)

3 If they don't include Michigan, people will be pissed. If they include Michigan and favor Clinton, people will be pissed. If they include Michigan and favor Obama, people will be pissed. If they include Michigan and split the delegates 50/50, people will be pissed.

Welcome to the no-win situation! This primary just gets more fun every day.

Posted by: NG at April 29, 2008 04:09 PM (ym/Kq)

4 They told me there would be no math in this meaningless state primary.

Posted by: Carl in N.H. at April 29, 2008 04:15 PM (x5zLq)

5 Joanie, no need to take credit for Michael Moore's accomplishments.

Posted by: pbrown at April 29, 2008 04:17 PM (vxGjP)

6

If they don't include Michigan, people will be pissed. If they include Michigan and favor Clinton, people will be pissed. If they include Michigan and favor Obama, people will be pissed. If they include Michigan and split the delegates 50/50, people will be pissed.

Welcome to the no-win situation! This primary just gets more fun every day.

Yeah, it would be a lot funner if we had a better candidate than McCain though.

And to the 'tards out there- no, the Bircheresque Crank does not fit the bill.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2008 04:17 PM (plsiE)

7 Awarding results regardless of the actual vote. The Democrats learned how to try and do this in Florida in 2000.

Posted by: DIck Nixon at April 29, 2008 04:29 PM (9qhs/)

8 If that's how they're playing it, Razor-H should have asked for more in her original proposal. That way, when they split the difference she would have ended up in better position.

Hell, let's just do all the elections this way from now on.

Posted by: mr. frakypants at April 29, 2008 04:30 PM (bZAfL)

9 Robert Mugabe dismisses these guys as rookies.

Posted by: eddiebear at April 29, 2008 04:32 PM (1bEen)

10 And the best part is that Rev. Al and Jesse J are fueling up their jets as we speak in their efforts to bring their traveling circuses wherever they feel "the call".

Posted by: eddiebear at April 29, 2008 04:33 PM (1bEen)

11

Rock Paper Scissors for all the marbles would make more sense than this.

Posted by: Hermit Dave at April 29, 2008 04:34 PM (Tk5HT)

12 ^or a game of Twister.


Posted by: eddiebear at April 29, 2008 04:36 PM (1bEen)

13 One potato, two potato? Eenie, Meenie?

Posted by: NG at April 29, 2008 04:47 PM (ym/Kq)

14

7 Awarding results regardless of the actual vote. The Democrats learned how to try and do this in Florida in 2000.

Well it is their primary so they're always free to go back to the smoke-filled room of the past if they want. The problem here is that they're changing the rules after the fact.

Regardless of the rules, in the end it comes down to the Credentials Committee and Howard Dean. If they seat all of Hillary's FL delegates, there isn't anything Obama can do except complain.

Posted by: Maetenloch (not a maniac) at April 29, 2008 04:50 PM (tZ4B9)

15

Couldn't they solve all of this by giving Obama a sex change?

Posted by: Dogstar at April 29, 2008 04:57 PM (FgxdU)

16

No matter what happens.

No matter how this turns out.

I'm *still* going to be the Gold Standard, baby.

Gold. Standard.

Posted by: Chicago, 1968 at April 29, 2008 04:58 PM (UeP9e)

17 Dems want to run the country, hell they can't even select a nominee.  I predict that the general election will have to be posponed until after the court battles following their convention.

Posted by: Hammer at April 29, 2008 05:04 PM (XWJh5)

18 16 No matter what happens.

No matter how this turns out.

I'm *still* going to be the Gold Standard, baby.

Gold. Standard.

Just like an aging self-absorbed baby-boomer, Chicago '68 underestimates the new generation of leftist thumbsuckers.  He doubts their ability to self-destruct at a Democrat Convention.  This is just flat-out wrong.  Senator Barry has proven he can lead his lemmings followers right over a cliff.

Can They Do It?

Yes They Can!

Posted by: KingShamus at April 29, 2008 05:20 PM (rSqDf)

19

Is there still anyone who thinks, either one of these buffoons can be elected, if they're nominated?

McCain can't possibly be that much of a Poopy-head.

Posted by: franksalterego at April 29, 2008 05:24 PM (iFzs0)

20 ^and that is depressing. It's like wanting a Lewinski, and all you have to choose from is Monica, your wife's fat ass friend, or your shemale coworker.

Posted by: eddiebear at April 29, 2008 05:29 PM (1bEen)

21

"McCain can't possibly be that much of a Poopy-head."

Oh, yes he can.

Posted by: Don Carne at April 29, 2008 05:29 PM (wSNS7)

22

Is there still anyone who thinks, either one of these buffoons can be elected, if they're nominated?

McCain can't possibly be that much of a Poopy-head.

Hard to say.  If he acts the wuss and sticks to his pronounced plan to run a positive campaign without going negative (or allowing others to do so), he could very easily be beaten.  As much dirt as Obama and Hillary have on them, it would be insane not to use it- they'll certainly go negative (themselves or through third parties, including MSM allies) on him.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2008 05:30 PM (plsiE)

23 Hey, it's not our fault that McCain is a sleazebag, while Hillary is a warrior for the common folk, and Obama (PBUH) shoots race-healing rainbows out his ass.  We're completely impartial!

Posted by: The MSM at April 29, 2008 05:35 PM (Tk5HT)

24 They already are going negative on Mccain.

Gleefully laughing at how they can make him look older by accentuating his POW-typical gut.  Going on and on about 100 years of peaceful presence in Iraq, kinda like Japan carbombs.

Obama is an extremist.  All his supporters are extremists, and they are so left, they are totally unable to distinguish a very moderate Mccain from Bush.  To them, there is no difference, even after years of Mccain complaining about Bush policies.

But we all pretend that Mccain is the only one who can go negative.  I prefer for him to stay in his comfort zone, talk about issues, and let the rest of us hammer Obama.  Mccain is laying the groundwork for a bitter, bitter set of attacks on Obama and his terrorist friends... that Mccain will not have any association with.  If anything, the attackers will also be saying "jeez, too bad we've got Mccain!" and "Mccain is too damn nice!". 

One think Reagen democrats love about Mccain is that the far right hates him.  It's really a huge plus electorally, and I hope it has coattails for the next congress.

Posted by: Gohuckyourself at April 29, 2008 05:41 PM (8jYMc)

25 Yeah you can pretty much rely on the party leadership to crap on the voters.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at April 29, 2008 05:48 PM (3+3kx)

26

's anybody really know what time it is?

,s anybody really care?!

Posted by: jognot at April 29, 2008 05:50 PM (+63vk)

27 They aren't counting the votes right.  They need to be re-examined for voter intention.  If they did that, Gore would end up with at least 40-50 delegates.  Come on, haven't we learned anything from 2000.

Posted by: David at April 29, 2008 05:55 PM (h6x5i)

28 Any word from Rev. Jerry?

Posted by: Guy Ritchie's Career at April 29, 2008 06:18 PM (PRWf8)

29 Hollowpoint, has Franken succeeded in making Minnesota purple yet?  Who is more popular in MN, Barry or Hillary?  I think a dem ticket with Obama and Franken could possibly put MN in play?

Posted by: funky chicken at April 29, 2008 06:29 PM (I+jPP)

30

Only Obama cares about the black voters, the Dem party does not.  They will find a way to throw the supers to Hillary,  Its still 4 months till the convention, plenty of time to show Barrack as the simpering fool he is.

Posted by: tonynoboloney at April 29, 2008 06:34 PM (Bxtd0)

31 Explain this to me. 

No one made Obama withdraw he could have left his name on the ballot.  The fact that he didn't is his fault so he should get ZERO delegates. 

Posted by: chad at April 29, 2008 06:49 PM (WNcvq)

32 This is good for us for the simple reason that it's back in the news. As long as we're talking about FL and MI, it will stay fresh in those people's minds as we get closer to election day.

ALSO: "Carrier" on PBS sucks. Half of today's 2 episodes are a commentary about Iraq and the WOT. That black girl (with the buck-teeth) is especially stupid and ignorant.

Posted by: Bart at April 29, 2008 06:52 PM (o/is7)

33 ^
shut up, sugar tits

Posted by: Mel Gibson at April 29, 2008 06:59 PM (o/is7)

34

Hollowpoint, has Franken succeeded in making Minnesota purple yet?  Who is more popular in MN, Barry or Hillary?  I think a dem ticket with Obama and Franken could possibly put MN in play?

Well, with his recent tax fiasco he seems to be trying, if unintentionally.

I live in Minneapolis; Obama is definitely more popular in the Twin Cities proper- Minneapolis has a large population of college students (Ron Paul!) and younger voters along with a lot of lower income "ethnic" voters.

St. Paul has a significant Hispanic population and is overall a bit older and middle class; I'd guess Obama is a lot more popular in Minneapolis than in St. Paul- how much more I don't know.

Outstate is very white, more socially conservative (bitter!) and would favor Hillary- though I suspect McCain would pick up more than a few outstate Dems, even if McCain's opposition to ethanol subsidies would hurt him among the agricultural community somewhat.

Minnesota hasn't gone red since 1972.  However McCain (who I have big problems with) has a pretty good chance of doing well here.  Franken will do well among college kids, young professionals and party line Democrats, but so far I'd say his chances aren't good.  His best chance is to go negative on Coleman and make him out to be a Bush clone.

Franken has Minnesota roots, but he doesn't have a very strong connection to the state.  People laugh about Ventura (understandably), but he at least was a suburban mayor and radio host before getting elected.  Franken is only vaguely from here- I don't think having him as a VP pick would help all that much in MN.  Not that Hillary or Obama would be dumb enough to pick him.

And needless to say, the Star Tribune will shill for the Dems and attack the Republicans.  Water also wet.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2008 07:01 PM (v8vVW)

35

Explain this to me. 

No one made Obama withdraw he could have left his name on the ballot.  The fact that he didn't is his fault so he should get ZERO delegates. 

Both are supposed to get ZERO delegates from MI under the rules at the time of the primaries there.

Not that I care if Hillary gets delegates and Obama gets none- the ensuing bloodbath would be fun to watch.  From beyond rock-throwing range, anyways.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2008 07:06 PM (v8vVW)

36

The thing I'm unable to gauge is whether or not the Dems' changing of the rules on the fly will help or hurt with the squishy middle... my guess is that it won't make a bit of difference.

tmi3rd

Posted by: tmi3rd at April 29, 2008 07:10 PM (9bytU)

37

tmi3rd --

I agree with you -- no difference at all.  It's way too 'inside baseball' for the general electorate (read: idiots) to care.  You can't even make a good news story out of it -- no drama.

Hillary should have them seated as long as she doesn't push too hard.  Small majority for her is fine.  Huge majority might make it a real news item.

Posted by: Hermit Dave at April 29, 2008 07:50 PM (Tk5HT)

38 Dems want to run the country, hell they can't even select a nominee. I predict that the general election will have to be posponed until after the court battles following their convention. This is actually a plausible R-tard democrat STUNT scenario that republicans should be prepared for.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at April 29, 2008 08:32 PM (9+ysr)

39 to add...Democrats have shown they do not abide or like rules (laws) they are all there to be broken

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at April 29, 2008 08:35 PM (9+ysr)

40 Democrats making complicated rules without thinking through the consequences? Hmm.

Posted by: exception at April 29, 2008 08:49 PM (Kg9kO)

41 If only we can keep this circus going until, say, November 2012, we might be able to cancel this election and get a new batch of candidates.

Posted by: MlR at April 29, 2008 09:12 PM (mX6h5)

42

With the Liberals, the circus is always in town.

Ixney on canceling the election. There might be a troll lurking and warn KOS to our evil plans!

Posted by: AmeriDan at April 29, 2008 09:30 PM (IvDbl)

43
"Yeah you can pretty much rely on the party leadership to crap on the voters." Posted by: Christopher Taylor

Its no more than we deserve for being racist, sexist elitists.

Posted by: Democrats at April 30, 2008 01:40 AM (MUcqt)

44 I can't believe this shit. Passing edicts then violating them, making the rules as you go along, then changing them- this is shit that would get you thrown out of a card game at age 6.

Dear Democrats: Bon appetit.

Posted by: lauraw at April 30, 2008 03:03 AM (DbybK)

45 Hermit Dave -- please be careful referring to people who don't spend as much time as we do wonking over this stuff as "idiots" because of it. Although I realize we it sucks to admit, there's no real evidence yet that us "splitting atoms with our heads morons" make better choices in the long run than those "idiots." It could be that choosing a President based on your gut feeling about how they'll react in a crisis is better than all the political analysis and inside baseball in the world. Not saying it is, just that it could be, and I'm not willing to call people who don't waste all their time on sites like this idiots because of it. Maybe they're too busy getting laid or something.

Posted by: mr.frakypants at April 30, 2008 03:08 AM (PonvG)

46 How is it that both D candidates can use the Bob the Builder line and no one notices?

Can we do it? Yes we can!

Stop treating me like a 3 year old.

Posted by: Dave @ at April 30, 2008 03:11 AM (L1Dtq)

47 What this kind of reminds me of, for some reason, are the smaller fake "political parties" that were "coalition partners" with the Communist Party of East Germany, and always got the same percentage of the vote in their fake elections.

Posted by: Dave J at April 30, 2008 03:38 AM (glamO)

48 I'm not willing to call people who don't waste all their time on sites like this idiots because of it. Maybe they're too busy getting laid or something.

Nah, this is great for multi-tasking . The biggest trick is balancing the laptop on your wife/significant other, but it's only an issue for 3-7 minutes at most.

Posted by: Andy at April 30, 2008 03:44 AM (23Gys)

49

"according to how Democratic bigs figure the public would have voted"--Ace

EXACTLY.

Smoke and mirrors all the way, folks, so get on board the DNC Express.

The DNC is the party against the little people and for the rich fat cats that claim to be the little people, at least when they were younger, or at least their daddy or grampy were little people, or at least they saw a little person in the gutter once upon a time. The "new rich" as known ages past run the DNC, not making the "new rich" democratic by any means of the word. The majority doesn't rule the DNC! And the little people don't determine anything in the DNC.

Today the tax evaders run the DNC, the ones who legislate taxes for all but them to pay. Legislate a tax "holiday" on gasoline? Rather than Big Brother providing the tax break, the DNC will force big business to pay whatever taxes would have been collected. The DNC will never foot its own bills! What a screwed up lot they are; they refuse to take responsibility for being irresponsible as a government while they refuse to allow individual responsibility by assuming the government "right" to be the mommy state. Why should the little people make any decision that could affect the rich fat cat new rich tax evaders adversely? Keep things as they are, dangling carrot programs for the starving masses to salivate and focus on, while plotting how to become more PURELY totalitarian nationally and globally. Such fine "intentions", looking out for the little people, doing what is best for the rich fat cats who deny any relevance of the original Constitution. Why should something so trivial as a VOTE matter in the DNC masterplan community? Voters didn't "develop" the masterplan; they just buy a share of nothingness to rub shoulders in line together.

Sad thing about the mirrors when the eyes can't see through the smoke to recognize oneself at face value. Those "green" hypocritical liars are producing all that smoke and haze. Call it a BBQ and everyone buys a plate at the DNC chow down. The liberally corrupted meat and hijacked slaw have gone sour. Just because you smother it all in the finest propaganda sauce ever doesn't mean the diner won't pay in digestive spades.

Conservatives must now persist in defining progressives as the worst of the worst hypocrites full of gaseous intentions that only amount to sorrow and despair on the ground.

Nit pick the vote and nit pick the payment plan -- GO GOP!

Posted by: maverick muse at April 30, 2008 03:52 AM (1cbR0)

50

his supporters are extremists, and they are so left, they are totally unable to distinguish a very moderate Mccain from Bush.  To them, there is no difference, even after years of Mccain complaining about Bush policies.

You can?

WTF? GEORGE BUSH is apparently some sort of arch-conservative, unlike the very moderate (yay!) McCain.

God you people suck.

I quit.

Posted by: Entropy at April 30, 2008 03:56 AM (m6c4H)

51

The DNC will never foot its own bills!

How totally unlike the RNC....

What a screwed up lot they are; they refuse to take responsibility for being irresponsible as a government while they refuse to allow individual responsibility by assuming the government "right" to be the mommy state.

Yeah..that R, err, DNC....

Posted by: Entropy at April 30, 2008 03:58 AM (m6c4H)

52 That's it. I'm voting for Entropy. That's Entropy, not entropy. Little 'e' entropy always wins.

Posted by: S. Weasel at April 30, 2008 04:11 AM (rasT+)

53 Couldn't they solve all of this by giving Obama a sex change?

He's already part-way there, since lately he's proven that he has no testicles.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at April 30, 2008 06:01 AM (Ds4I5)

54 I'm listening to some ABC reporter talking about how fucked up the donks nomination process. They tried to rush through a candidate early thereby bypassing a vetting system. Now, they are stuck with this lightening rod Obama. Obama wins caucus states but Clinton would win the election.

Posted by: Guy Ritchie's Career at April 30, 2008 06:17 AM (PRWf8)

55 There are many online stores having birkenstock shoe on sale, i believe you gonna like it!Yesterday, my friend bought a birkenstock sandals which is so beautiful, i am surprised by the design and style. Do you have a pair of  now? if not, go to online birkenstock storestore and have one, it is so amazing!!!

Posted by: saly sa at April 11, 2011 05:22 AM (jQ3Gm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
101kb generated in CPU 0.09, elapsed 1.2236 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.1608 seconds, 291 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.