Back in December I briefly commented at The Confluence under the nom de plume “Obot3000,” and I had an interesting experience that Riverdaughter’s latest post reminded me of. Long story short, while trying to tease out why some PUMAs think Obama’s a Marxist, and others thing he’s a republican, Riverdaughter “explained” it to me, by way of how he stole the nomination.
Obot: you are right in that many PUMAs are as confused by Obama’s political philosophy as Obamaphiles are. However, what we are NOT confused about is Obama’s goodness, freshness, honesty or integrity. He has none of those characteristics. Don’t forget that while smoke got in your eyes during the primary, we were following the caucus fraud, registration irregularities, theft of Hillary’s delegates in Mi, not to mention his squelching of a devote in FL and MI and the most disingenuous, illogical argument for taking 59 delegates in a state where he wasn’t even on the ballot. You realize that he was only 17 delegates ahead of Hillary going into the convention don’t you? Oh, you didn’t know that? I’m not surprised because the media and the campaign didn’t want anyone to notice that that lead would have been eaily wiped out if MI hadn’t awarded all of the uncommitted delegates to him In fact, Hillary would have been the leader going into the convention and she would have been more than justified in insisting on a floor fight. But the FL and MI delegations weren’t restored to full strength, like it was planned all along, until the day before the convention started. That gave Obama the appearance of being the winner when he wasn’t/ And with Hillary’s campaign on mute in the media outlets, he stole the nomination. Then he topped it all off with delegate threats and intimidation and misinformation followed by a lopsided and humiliating roll call vote at the convention.
Emphasis added by me. I highlight that part because I actually responded that no, I hadn’t know that. Then I linked to several sources, including the RCP delegate count, to demomstrate that this claim of 17 delegates was disingenuous at best, and downright dishonest at worst. Don’t bother looking though, after that, Kim Haas, defender of democracy, scrubbed my comments lest any blissfully ignorant PUMAs read them and look it up for themselves.
So it struck me again when today, in the middle of rant about Jon Stewart as tedious and sanctimonious as it was wrongheaded, Km wrote the following.
And what does the RBC do? It takes delegates away from the real winner and gives them to the loser and gives him 59 delegates from a state where he wasn’t even on the ballot, so that he will beat her by a mere 17 delegates when the primaries finally end a few days later. Then, they make it sound like it’s a big landslide, giving him the edge all the way to the convention. She *should* have taken it to the convention
First, let us dispatch with this claim of 17 delegates.
According to the Real Clear Politics totals, if you were to count FL and MI at full voting strength, giving Clinton 73 delegates and Obama none from Michigan, Obama would still enter the convention with an 18 delegate lead (17 is close enough- maybe an edwards delegate switched at some point). This was the subject of much discussion last year, but this scenario was without doubt the single most undemocratic way to allocate those delegates.
Leaving that aside, though, look what Riverdaughter is arguing. UNder even the most contorted method of counting, her candidate fell short, more so when you count superdelegates (Prowl failure there…).
And what were the delegate counts after the RBC meeting but before the last 3 primaries? DemConWatch has this handy breakdown of the count under 5 scenarios.
- Do not seat Florida or Michigan. Current Official DNC rules- Obama up by 155 pledged delegates.
- Seat Michigan based on new the proposal 69-59 split, but not Florida. Obama up by 145 pledged delegates.
- Seat Florida, based on January election, but not Michigan. FL Pledged get ½ votes, superdelegates get full vote. Obama up by 127 pledged delegates.
- Scenario 4: Combine scenario 2 and scenario 3. FL 1/2 vote, MI 69-59 split and Super full vote. Obama up by 117 pledged delegates.
- Scenario 5: Seat FL & MI based on the elections that have taken place. (Obama does not get MI 55 uncommitted). Obama up by 46 pledged delegates.
Hillary netted 20 additional delegates after the RBC in the 3 remaining contests.
Let’s be clear what Kim Haas is indignant about. She felt that Hillary should have been awarded all of the MI and Fl votes at full voting strength, and Obama none from MI. And then he still would have had a pledged delegate lead, so whe wanted Jon Stewart to help her make fun of the superdelegates until they tipped the scales for Hillary? And all this from the woman that wrote these things 2 years ago?
She’s entitled to her opinion that Hillary should have lost by slightly fewer delegates after a nasty and contentious convention battle. And of course, that opinion is why she’s a hilarious PUMA. But it’s downright bizzare to chastise Jon Stewart for not indulging her own narcissitic view of the world.