Replies

If the RBC -- as it's now the fashion to call it in heated bar conversations -- seats all the delegates, Clinton would be 55 delegates closer to Obama, whom she currently trails by 200 delegates. That ruling would also legitimize the popular vote in the two states and thereby Clinton's claim that more people have voted for her than for her opponent... Committee rules may not allow the full seating; counting delegates and votes from Michigan would be unfair to Obama, who was not on the ballot in the state; and to seat all delegates would virtually erase the sanctions that were put in place to keep states from jumping ahead in the established order of primaries. There's another bedrock principle at stake here: The rules are the rules.

Oh, who is that guy kiddin'? The fact that the DNC allows any challenge or debate about this shows that the Dhimmicratic Party doesn't have any rules per se. What a whitewash job. Or maybe blackwash. Or half-blackwash.

Obama (for the record) REMOVED HIMSELF from the Michigan ballot, which he wasn't required to do, and Hillary didn't remove herself, but didn't campaign either. He's NOT ENTITLED to any Michigan delegates, period.

If the DNC votes to admit the delegation, then -- according to the rules-are-the-rules school of what passes for thought -- the breakdown has to be under their rules, which is to day, Hillary won a bunch of delegates, and the rest are UNCOMMITTED, and can vote for whomever they choose. ANYTHING ELSE is a smoke filled room type deal, and completely corrupt -- IOW, they'll choose ANYTHING ELSE.