David: The Clinton Campaign Explains Delegates
Hey, check out the Hillary campaign's new website
Delegate Hub
I was confused about a few of the statements and "FACT"s, so I sent the following message to the campaign via their website.
Hello,
I am attempting to explain the delegate system to others and discovered Delegate Hub (www.delegatehub.com) this morning. I find a lot of the information interesting, and would like to pass it along. I am looking for clarification on a few items, however.
The second fact states that "neither candidate can secure the nomination without automatic delegates". Is this referring to the situation as it stands now, or to Democratic candidate nominations in general? I am assuming (and this assumption seems to be verified by the first fact "pledged delegates and automatic delegates are the same...") that a candidate could secure the nomination without the support of any superdelegates, if they still maintained a majority of overall delegates.
In the copy following this fact, it is stated that, "The Obama campaign is trying to shut down the Democratic race before the rest of the country votes." Is there evidence for this statement? I have not seen any news reporting on the Obama campaign's attempts to do this, and would like to be able to cite specific instances to others who may doubt the veracity of this statement.
I also am looking for verification on this statement, "The Obama campaign is claiming that automatic delegates must follow the lead of pledged delegates and switch their vote to Sen. Obama." I have not heard reports of this. I have also searched Senator Obama's own campaign website for this claim, and have been unable to locate it.
Another question I have concerns the Michigan and Florida delegates. It is stated that, "Hillary Clinton believes that the voices of 600,000 Michigan primary voters and 1.75 million Florida primary voters should be heard at the Democratic convention." Did Senator Clinton state her intention to pursue these delegates before the voting took place?
It is also stated that, "In the 2004 presidential race, the turnout in Michigan was only a quarter of what it was this year - and the 2004 turnout in Florida was less than half of what it was this year." Are these figures a comparison of the general election turnout to this primary turnout, or primary turnout for both years?
As for the last fact, could you provide me with the calculation that arrived at the "barely 1%" statistic in reference to the divide between the two candidates delegate counts? Does this include assigning automatic delegates to a candidate?
Many news sources are including automatic delegate counts in their tallies of the race. Is it premature to include these counts, since these delegates are not "pledged" to any particular candidate?
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to sharing your clarification on these items with friends and colleagues who have yet to cast their ballots.
Best wishes,
David Emerson
![[Valid RSS]](themes/vent_classic/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")