?

Log in

No account? Create an account
MDP releases delegate numbers - Zer Netmouse
February 15th, 2008
10:08 am

[Link]

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
MDP releases delegate numbers
Not sure what this means considering the stance of the national committee, but anyway the cogent points are thus:


Overall, Clinton will have 73 pledged delegates, 16 pledged alternates, and 10 committee members, and there will be 55 uncommitted delegates, 5 uncommitted alternates, and 8 uncommitted committee members.

Eighty-three (83) pledged delegates and 15 pledged alternates will be elected at Congressional District Conventions on March 29, 2008. The remaining 45 pledged delegates and 6 pledged alternates will be elected at a State Central Committee meeting on May 17, 2008 in Grand Rapids. Committee members will be elected that day by the entire delegation.

These 128 pledged delegates, 21 pledged alternates and 18 committee members together with 28 unpledged delegates (also known as “super delegates”) will constitute Michigan’s delegation to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado on August 25-28.


(In order to join in at the district conventions in electing the people who will serve as delegates, you need to have been a member of the Michigan Democratic party by Jan 31 of this year. Which I was. I haven't decided if I'll go participate or not.)

(7 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments
 
[User Picture]
From:atdt1991
Date:February 15th, 2008 03:39 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Uhm, I didn't see anything (admittedly, I stopped following the news for a few days) about Michigan suddenly getting their delegates. What's up?

And that just pisses me the hell off.
[User Picture]
From:atdt1991
Date:February 15th, 2008 03:50 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Alright, I've clicked around, and I think I see what you're saying - they've declared the number of delegates they'd like to send, but they're still not, as of this moment, going to be counted.
[User Picture]
From:novapsyche
Date:February 15th, 2008 03:58 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Most of what I've heard about a possible compromise involves Michigan's and Florida's delegates (if seated at all) to be seated only after the other delegates have voted. This is so that everyone can say the states participated but their delegates would not have swayed the party's ultimate decision.

Another compromose would be for Michigan to have a "do-over"--probably a caucus to replace the stripped primary. (The only way for the revote to take place would be to hold another primary, which the state would have to pay for [which, of course, it won't], or a caucus, which would be the only way for the Democratic party to assume the costs.) Florida apparently would fight any do-over tooth and nail.
[User Picture]
From:kickaha
Date:February 15th, 2008 06:06 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Seating afterwards won't sway anything... unless it comes down to a close race, and they'd be the deciders...

Oopsie. (Personally, just out of a fit of spite towards political parties in general, I'd love it if Clinton ended up having a very tiny slight lead at that point - just to watch the camps try and wriggle they way into arguing exactly the opposite of what they're arguing for now.)

Better hope one of them ends up winning prior to the national, or this is going to be *UGLY*. With a capital Ugh.
[User Picture]
From:knightlygoddess
Date:February 15th, 2008 06:01 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Government was my weakest subject, and everything you posted above just made my head hurt. And I didn't understand a word of it.

Damn good thing that I won't be teaching any civics classes.
[User Picture]
From:beckybmw
Date:February 15th, 2008 07:56 pm (UTC)
(Link)
So.

First, I recognize that it's very likely that all of the delegates in Michigan won't count at all.

However.

If, by some chance, it turns out that Michigan (and, for that matter, Florida) will get to use their delegates, isn't it unfair to use that dispertion of delegates among Hillary and Uncommitted? I personally would prefer them not to count at all. If we had a normal primary and all of the possible candidates were on the ballot, we would have had much higher voter turnout, and Hillary would have received much fewer votes. To me, it is highly suspect to even think about using Michigan delegates based on the primary we had. I say, if they're even going to think about using delegates from Michigan and Florida, we need to re-do our state primary election completely.

That was probably unprovoked, but I felt the need to get that off my chest. I feel a little better. :)
[User Picture]
From:novapsyche
Date:February 17th, 2008 11:40 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Ayup, those are my feelings as well.
Netmouse on the web Powered by LiveJournal.com