Michigan & Florida "delegate" counts

According to the Green Papers, Florida's pledged delegates -- if they are seated at the convention -- would break down like this: Clinton 108, Obama 77. Clinton also has 5 (hypothetical) superdelegates from Florida; Obama has 2. Eighteen Florida superdelegates have yet to declare an allegiance. (This raises an existential question: if you're an unpledged, undeclared, unallied "delegate" from a state that has no delegates, aren't you basically a nonexistent nonentity?) So the total Florida delegate (or rather, "delegate") tally is Clinton 113, Obama 79, undeclared superdelegates 18.

Combine that with Michigan (73 pledged to Hillary, 55 for Uncommitted, 6 superdelegates for Hillary, 1 superdelegate for Obama, 1 superdelegate for Edwards, and 20 undeclared superdelegates), and you've got the following combined breakdown of the two disputed delegate slates, including the declared supers: Clinton 192, Obama 79, Edwards 1, Uncommitted 55, undeclared superdelegates 38.

A big question that I don't know the answer to -- but maybe someone out there does -- is whether Michigan's 55 "Uncommitted" delegates will be Obama delegates by any other name. Certainly, most of the voters who cast their ballots for Uncommitted on Yooper Tuesday were Obama supporters, but does that necessarily mean that the Uncommitted delegates will be Obama loyalists? It depends on Michigan's delegate selection process (i.e., not the process of allocating the numerical delegates, but the process of choosing the individual humans who fill the allocations), and I don't know how that works.

Assuming for the sake of argument that the Uncommitted delegates favor Obama, and further assuming that Edwards eventually throws his delegates (or rather, in this case, his delegate) to Obama, the breakdown would be Clinton 192, Obama 136, undeclared superdelegates 38. That's Obama's best-case scenario, and it's still a substantial edge for Hillary. Heck, even if every single undeclared superdelegate eventually backs Obama, which seems highly unlikely, we're still looking at a 20-delegate Clinton edge.

Like I said, if the Democratic nomination comes down to a knock-down, drag-out fight over whether these delegates get seated, it's going to be a big stinkin' mess.

P.S. Another important question that I don't know the answer to, at least not for sure: if the delegates from Michigan and Florida aren't seated, does that change the total number of delegates needed to win the nomination?

Normally, the Democratic nominee needs 2,208 delegates (50.01% of the delegate total, 4,415) to win the nomination. With Michigan and Florida excluded, the total number of delegates needed is reduced to 4,049. Presumably, that reduces the nomination-winning "magic number" to 50.01% of 4,049, which is 2,025. Or does it? The Green Papers assumes (or perhaps actually knows) that it does, but is this actually a settled issue, I wonder? It can't have come up too often before!

Suppose the expected breakdown coming into the convention is something like Clinton 2,100, Obama 1,949. Clinton's total would be 52% of 4,409, but only 48% of 4,415. Could Obama try to insist that the winner needs to get a majority of the pre-sanction delegate total -- in other words, that Hillary needs 2,208 delegates after all (the original "magic number"), which would amount to 54.5% of the delegates actually seated? It seems like a battle Obama would probably lose in that scenario, but it's just another example of how this thing could be a huge mess.

UPDATE: As noted in the post above, John Edwards has dropped out of the race. Politico's Ben Smith writes that Edwards's departure "makes a long race, and a brokered convention, far, far less likely. ... If it's one-on-one, the road to an absolute majority is a lot clearer."

Clearer, yes, but still not totally clear. If the "winner" gets less than ~65% of the pledged delegates, he or she will be dependent on superdelegates to secure a majority at the convention. The superdelegates are notoriously fickle, and will want to "back the winner." If Hillary beats Obama in the pledged delegate count (or, less likely, vice versa) by something like 60% to 40%, this won't be much of an issue, because the superdelegates will back the presumed winner. But if it's 51% to 49%, it will still be a brokered convention, because it'll be up to the unpleged superdelegates to decide who wins.

Comments

[Ken]

The uncommitted delegates are of course actual people who "ran" as uncommitted delegates so regardless of what voters may have been trying to say (in your opinion) as to their preference...these delegates (if they become delegates that is) will be allowed to vote for whomever they please (as will Edwards delegates once he officially releases them...while he can endorse a candidate he can not force his delegates to vote for a particular candidate). A lot can (and will) happen between now and the convention and you can bet that Obama and Clinton will be trying to sway the officially uncommitted as well as the new uncommitted Edwards delegates to vote their way.

Additionally, as I pointed out in another thread, the Democrats proceed at their own peril if they don't seat the Florida (and Michigan) delegates and Obama (who presumably would have objected) becomes the nominee. The disenfranchizing of the Florida voters will not go over well there in November when the Democrats probably will need to win Florida to win the election.

[Will]

It gets ugly both ways. If Clinton wins based on the seating of Michigan and Florida, Obama supporters stay home in the general election and McCain wins. This needs a solution now, agreed to by both campaigns, not at the Convention.

This is a big scam, that definetely favors the Obama and the republical campagne.

This is a big scam, that definetely favors the Obama and the republical campagne.