Michigan Proposes 69-59 Pledged Delegate Split

Michigan Proposes 69-59 Pledged Delegate Split


That’s in favor of Hillary, so she could come out of today with a net of 29 delegates if Florida is seated according to the compromise offered by Jon Ausman.

They determined this based on the actual vote, exit polls of who cast votes for “uncommitted” and voters who wrote in Obama’s name (those votes didn’t count).

But this is going to be a much tougher nut to crack than Florida. People are already talking about how exit polls aren’t an accurate reflection of voter preference, etc.

Sure, but what else are you going to base it on? A coin toss? Everybody knows that the “uncommitted” vote went for Obama. To say anything different is intellectually dishonest.

More as it develops…

  • mike mcEachran

    I’ve lost count. Will any of this have an impact on the outcome? I thought that as long as Michigan awards SOME delegates to Obama, which they are sure to do, then Obama retains his lead. Right?

  • http://stubbornfacts.us/ Tully

    Don’t forget the superdelegates involved. Can’t get an accurate count without ’em.

    *Everybody knows that the “uncommitted” vote went for Obama. To say anything different is intellectually dishonest.*

    Bull. Many (and maybe even most) of them were for Edwards, who led Obama in the MI Dem polling at the time of the MI primary. What’s intellectually dishonest is to not notice that fact. Though with Obama getting Edward’s endorsement it may make no practical difference at all in the count at this point.

    Levin’s calling for a 73-55 split right now. As the old joke goes, they’ve settled on the act, now they’re dickering over the price.

    In case it’s not yet obvious to you, Clinton supporters have a majority on the committee. They’re going to maximize what they can under a claim of applyig the 50% rule. As foretold in the prophecy…

  • http://stubbornfacts.us/ Tully

    *Will any of this have an impact on the outcome? *

    On the nomination? Almost certainly not. Where it counts is in “poker chips” (delegates) available for the internal power struggle for party structure and control for the next four years. It’s not all about the nomination.

    Bonior is now arguing on behalf of Obama that MI delegates should be split evenly between the two candidates, effectively the same as not counting them at all.

  • http://stubbornfacts.us/ Tully

    Now Bonior on behalf of Obama is arguing for MI’s delegates to be split evenly, effectively the same as not counting them at all. Heh.

  • http://stubbornfacts.us/ Tully

    For reference, 73-55 would be the straight split from the actual MI results, giving Obama all the delegates not won by Clinton outright.

  • http://itsthe21stcenturystupid.wordpress.com/ Jim S

    OK, so I put the tube on MSNBC and here comes Howard Wolfson. Am I imagining it or did he say that they wouldn’t accept the Rules Committee decision if it didn’t go 100% their way? Why do I always think of Karl Rove when I see this guy?

  • mike mcEachran

    The pundits are saying that Clinton knows she can’t win the delegate count under any circumstances, but that as long as Florida and Michigan delegates are recognized in some proportion, she can lay claim to the popular vote. Then she can use that as a some kind of leverage – presumably to force Obama to give her the VP slot. My goodness. But she can only claim the popular vote if one does not attribute any of Michigan’s “uncommitted” votes to Obama. So she can’t really claim the popular vote either and keep a straight face – not to mention the fact that the popular vote has absolutely no bearing on anything. So, therefore, this whole exercise has absolutely no impact on the race at all. The nomination is Obama’s. It seems to me this is all about Hillary Clinton trying to bank as much political clout as she can before the spotlight on her dims.

  • gerryf

    The michigan results are completely invalid.

    As Tully noted, there were a lot of Edwards supporters here (I am a Michigan resident), but there were also a lot of people who voted for Hillary who wanted to vote for Obama, but he was not there to vote for. The üncommitted was a late ploy pushed by the Democratic Party but a lot of people voted for Hillary because she was the only major candidate still on the ballot (Kucinich was still there and running, and Mike Gravel and Christopher Dodd were there but had dropped out)

    If Obama and Edwards had been on the ballot Hillary’s numbers would have been much lower–people voted for her because A) She was there. B) Some people voted for her because they were annoyed Obama and Edwards had pulled their names and thought Hillary was making a stand for Michigan voters and C) Some people simply didn’t know about the last minute drive to vote uncommitted if you wanted Obama or Edwards.

  • http://stubbornfacts.us/ Tully

    gerryf, it’s never ever been about the rules or what’s fair.

    I see the final deal is the 69-59 split in MI and 50% weighting for both delegations, which guarantees that the Clinton campaign will carry an appeal to the convention unless she gets the insider deal she wants before then.

    And the beat goes on.