RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Hillary and Barack Are Sifting
March 11, 2008 9:36 AM
As the race for delegates -- any delegates -- intensifies, it's worth noting that a caucus victory in itself is not enough.
Many states that run caucuses have what is called a "sifting" process -- caucus night is the beginning, not the end, of the convoluted rules.
As the Associated Press has reported "if one side is unable to rally its supporters at any step along the way, it risks losing national delegates, much like Gary Hart did in 1984. Hart fared well in initial party caucuses when he ran for the Democratic nomination in 1984, only to see some of those delegates go to Walter Mondale at the state conventions, said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist who counted delegates for Mondale. Mondale went on to win the nomination before losing badly in the general election to Ronald Reagan.
"'If you're Gary Hart, you might say they got stolen,' Devine said. 'The fact is our campaign recognized that the first tier of the caucus process was not the end, it was the beginning.'"
No delegates have officially been assigned in Iowa, for instance, where caucus night Obama led 38% to Clinton's 29%. Media organizations projected what that would mean -- but nothing was or is official yet.
Iowa holds County Conventions on March 15, Congressional District Conventions on April 26 (when 29 delegates will be elected) then the State Convention in June, where 16 delegates will be elected.
All of these steps are important. Delegates can change their alliances as soon as at the County Conventions.
And as David P. Redlawsk at the Britannica Blog notes, "across Iowa some 30% of all county convention delegates are John Edwards supporters (more than Clinton has by a handful), and those folks may have to make a choice. The choice they make may determine whether Clinton or Obama comes out of Iowa with the bulk of our national delegates – either one could conceivably pick up all 14 of Edwards’ potential delegates. Normally that wouldn’t matter much, but this time around every delegate may make a difference.
"So what’s going to happen? Well, in my county – Johnson County, home of the University of Iowa – the Edwards delegation (which, for full disclosure, I lead) will attempt to remain together, to elect our own delegates pledged to Edwards to the District and State conventions. If we are successful in doing this, and if Edwards supporters in other counties in our district do the same, the Edwards delegation could be a major factor in determining what happens in April and June. We may get to elect our own national convention delegates or we may end up aligning with one of the other candidates, providing a significant boost to him or her."
Redlawsk says that "at least locally, only the Obama campaign has been making efforts to woo Edwards delegates. The Clinton campaign seems to be completely missing in action. If this is the case throughout Iowa, don’t be surprised if in April Obama is able to pad his delegate count by strategically continuing to campaign for the hearts and minds of county, district, and state convention delegates."
But elsewhere, there are anecdotal reports on liberal websites of Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign attempted to close the delegate gap as caucuses proceed to their second phase…picking off those pledged delegates, who are also not legally bound to vote for any candidate.
One writer in Adams County, Colorado, notes that at the "assembly" he attended last weekend -- the second phase of the Colorado Caucus -- he watched Obama's lead shrink from 55-45, his margin of victory, to 50-50.
"The same, I hear, is happening in other counties. Clinton actually still has a paid operation here working these county assemblies. At these county assemblies, delegates are chosen for the state convention, where, finally, the delegation to the national convention is chosen. So Adams county will be sending the same number of votes for Clinton as for Obama to the state convention. If, as anecdotally appears to be the case, Clinton does five points better at county than on caucus night, you could see her gaining several delegates that are currently being given to Obama. Potentially as many as 5-6. Most caucus states have similar systems, btw."
DailyKos has a round-up which notes that in Douglas County, Colo., the caucus night tally of 63% to 37% has now shifted to 61% to 39% -- Clinton gained 2% of the pledged delegates at the Douglas County assembly.
Josh Micah Marshall's Talking Points Memo is admirably on top of this story as well, noting Clinton's distinction in a Newsweek interview among "automatic delegates" (her campaign's Orwellian term for superdelegates), pledged delegates, and caucus delegates, in which she seemed to fuel what Roger Simon of the Politico reported weeks ago, that the Clintons were going to try to flip pledged delegates. (The Clinton campaign denied it would try to poach, as opposed to sift.)
"I have a very close race with Senator Obama," Clinton told Newsweek. "There are elected delegates, caucus delegates and superdelegates, all for different reasons, and they're all equal in their ability to cast their vote for whomever they choose. Even elected and caucus delegates are not required to stay with whomever they are pledged to."
ALL of this is within the rules.
- jpt
March 11, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (51)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Hilary should just announce NOW that Edwards will be her running mate. Game over.
Posted by: Jac | Mar 11, 2008 11:48:41 AM
The GOP does not want Clinton they know that she will win they have had thier fun now we will get down to the nitty gritty of how this works so all the spin about Obama since Iowa being the front runner is just that there is plenty of time to see a win for Hillary and no one is going to not let MI. and FL.not count.
Posted by: Bishop | Mar 11, 2008 11:44:38 AM
"Looks like Obama is still on the change bandwagon. Last night he told a rally in Mississipi that he blamed Hillary for the putting out the photo of him in african garb in order to scare people."
Let me guess. a lot of black folks in the crowd?
Posted by: geevill | Mar 11, 2008 11:38:21 AM
I'm supporting the 50/50 delegate split in Florida and Michigan.
If you are truly concern with seating the delegates, than this solution works and is no cost.
Now, if you are trying to fix the election and get Hillary more delegates...that is another story.
How can you be so concern with the people of Florida and Michigan having a voice..and the next breath you are saying the Superdelegates should go with their mind and not follow the people choice?????????
Posted by: Lawrence | Mar 11, 2008 11:35:38 AM
There is nothing holding any delegate to a certain candidate as we have seen with some jumping from Clinton to the Obama side, this is politics and unfortunately some just do not understand how it is done, so the Clinton camp has every right to see how many delegates they can get out of all this for their candidate.
Posted by: SJ | Mar 11, 2008 11:33:05 AM
I like what Jay Leno said last night: "The Democrats should forget about general election, they cann't even win their own election."
Posted by: Kitty | Mar 11, 2008 11:28:46 AM
I'm assuming that the people posting here are enjoying their freedom of speech.
I know the media does.
I've been writing online since before the Internet. (BBS) And, yes, it was during the time of the Clintons in the Whitehouse.
I've studied Bill and Hillary quite closely.
My main concern regarding Hillary is her concept that she is all knowing. She will not listen, she will not
discuss. She will dictate. (ALL for our
good.)
If Hillary makes it to the Whitehouse the media had better remember that one of the first things the Clintons did was shut the door to the press.
Us, dumb folks out here better be careful what we say.
Enjoy your freedom...while you have it.
Posted by: Jan | Mar 11, 2008 11:25:59 AM
If this thing goes to the convention and is hotly contested the question will be IF the democrats put forth a candidate, not when. It will be amazing if there is no legal action.
Posted by: flyover | Mar 11, 2008 11:20:38 AM
The election is about politics, something about which Hillary knows infinitely more than Mr. Obama, or much of his campaign.
It is totally normal to try to convince delegates to switch sides, and they will.
John Edwards delegates have to pick another candidate, and the others could switch if one candidate becomes the clear front runner or if one seems more electable than the other for some reason.
That's the way conventions always work. Always have, always will.
That's politics. obama know that and plays it under the radar. How about paying super delegates, which he does much more than she odes by 3:1. How about promising various female govenors consideration of a VP spot, (why do you think they are supporting him)
He plays politics, some would say even dirtier Chicago style politics even more than Hillary. What do you call winning an election with caucuses????
Politics.
Its normal. That's how you win.
Posted by: s.b. | Mar 11, 2008 11:10:33 AM
Looks like Obama is still on the change bandwagon. Last night he told a rally in Mississipi that he blamed Hillary for the putting out the photo of him in african garb in order to scare people. In the debate in Ohio he said that he took senator at her word that her campaingn did not have anything to do with the photo. Now he says she did. So he tells the voters of Ohio one thing and the voters of Mississippi another. Sound familiar? Naftagate? Well it seems Obama is for change that is if changing your mind counts as change. Now that is change we can beleive in!
Posted by: russell | Mar 11, 2008 11:09:08 AM
The election is about politics, something about which Hillary knows infinitely more than Mr. Obama, or much of his campaign.
It is totally normal to try to convince delegates to switch sides, and they will.
John Edwards delegates have to pick another candidate, and the pthers could switch if one candidate becomes the clear front runner or if one seems more electable than the other for some reason.
That's the way conventions always work. Always have, always will.
That's politics.
Posted by: s.b. | Mar 11, 2008 11:08:29 AM
Hillary is gonna burn her own house down before she lets Obama get the keys.
Looking more and more certain each day. This election is all about HER, not any of you.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | Mar 11, 2008 10:49:00 AM
Alright, Denmark then. :)
Posted by: Blake | Mar 11, 2008 10:32:22 AM
Its true that there seem to be a lack of understanding of the political process and the "rules" by people who support Obama. It is perfectly normal to convince delegates to switch sides, especially at caucuses which are in fact designed that way.
It is also normal and with in the rules to appeal to the credetial committee for Fl and MI delegates tobe seated, which was the assumption all along. They just didnt know it would be tied.
Its also within the rules to have a redo primary.
Obama's camp seems to like to cry foul when the rules or the process dont favour him.
Unfortunately for them, that's not the way the process works no matter how loudly they scream.
Delegates get to do what they want at convention.
Some delegates dont show, that's why you have alternates. Some delegates sleep in and miss votes. Some delegates register and them dont bother to vote. Some delegates switch sides. It happens all the time.
The electoral college is quite a bit more rock solid but technically even those delegates could change their minds.
Caucus delegates are definately fair game, especially Edwards delegates.
Posted by: s.b. | Mar 11, 2008 10:31:21 AM
Thus buyers remorse is stupid. The reason people have "shifted" is because of the unethical means by which Hillary wants to win. In the end, I can GUARANTEE you Obama supporters will NOT vote for her - just read his blogs...
Posted by: An Adult American Female | Mar 11, 2008 10:17:06 AM
I thought Obama voters were our intellutual superiors. Why are they so uneducated about the political nominmation process?
Posted by: chasseur | Mar 11, 2008 10:16:18 AM
"There are elected delegates, caucus delegates and superdelegates, all for different reasons"-- Hillary stated."But the best kind are stolen delegates"-- Hillary thought.
Posted by: Nitwit | Mar 11, 2008 10:14:40 AM
Money to Superdelegates: These current and former elected officials received campaign contributions from either Obama or Clinton in the 2006 and/or 2008 election cycles
Sen. Hillary Clinton (NY) Clinton $4,200 Clinton $0 Obama $4,200
Clinton $236,080
Obama $710,926
Contributions are based on data available electronically from the Federal Election Commission as of Jan. 11, 2008. The commitment of the superdelegates reflects their stance as of Feb. 25, 2008, and came from The Politico's running tally of superdelegates. Bold items were added after Feb. 14.
Obama donated $4,200 to Senator Hillary Clinton. So he endorses her for President I suppose?
Posted by: geevill | Mar 11, 2008 10:14:18 AM
Oh Blake, you're funny. In Canada, about 1% of the population choses Party delegates and nominees, you have to pay and be a member usually for 30 days or sometimes more before the vote. Republicans, Independents and those that want to register the same day would never be allowed to choose a Party nominee and Clinton would have been the clear winnner a long time ago.
Canadians have no idea why Democrats would allow people who aren't members of their PArty to make this decision for them.
Posted by: s.b. | Mar 11, 2008 10:13:55 AM
This always happens. If a raceis decided by the final caucuses often they shift dramtically inton the winning camp. Delegates are always courted going into political conventions, even after they have committed to one candidate, especially if the candidate is int hird place as in Edwards delegates.
This is totally normal. In fact routine.
Posted by: s.b. | Mar 11, 2008 10:10:15 AM
Post a comment
