By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Clinton supporter NJ Governor Jon Corzine adopts the proper standard for a Super Delegate, vote the will of the people as reflected in the popular vote:

This is the metric that supporters of both candidates will accept. And yes, let's revote Florida and Michigan please.

Similarly, John Murtha said:

Hillary Clinton simply cannot be the Democratic nominee if she doesn't win the popular vote, Pennsylvania congressman and Clinton-backer John Murtha said Wednesday. "Clinton has to win Pennsylvania," he argued in an interview. "She has to be ahead in the popular vote to have any chance at all of getting this nomination."

Good for Murtha. He is absolutely right.

I miss the debates. It looks like we will get at least one more and probably 2. . Hillary Clinton has agreed to a CBS North Carolina debate on April 27, in advance of the state's primary. No final word on whether Obama agreed.

An invitation to debate in Indiana is also pending.

There will be a Philly debate on April 16.

Yesterday, I asked what the difference was between the Credentials Committee and the Rules and Bylaws Committee and why the Clinton campaign in its response to Howard Dean's latest statement mentioned the Rules and Bylaws Committee when the media keeps talking about the Credentials Committee.

Marc Ambinder provides this possible explanation:

Here's what's happening. Remember the Ausman challenge? Well, there are actually two Ausman challenges -- one regarding Florida's superdelegates, and one regarding the ability of the party's rules and bylaws committee to penalize an entire delegation.

Sources close to the DNC's rules and bylaws committee say that the Ausman challenges WILL be heard -- and that if the votes are there, some Florida delegates could be seated -- temporarily -- by the end of April. (The seating would likely be appealed to the credentials committee, but we'll cross that suspension bridge when we pay the toll for it.)

More...

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

MYDD writes:

Dean seems to be moving; his earlier "they didn't follow the rules, tough luck" posture has been sliding off its pedestal a bit now that the word is out on the machinations by Donna Brazile to increase the penalty from half the delegates to all the delegates- that position seems to no longer be defensible. . . . FL Senator Bill Nelson is on record as supporting going with the original penalty from the DNC rules before Donna Brazile bumped it up to the death penalty - half the delegates. . .

(Emphasis supplied.) Was this whole fiasco all Donna Brazile's doing? Does anyone have more information on this? I always suspected she was behind it but since she shamelessly has continued to pontificate on the subject, I assumed she had some cover. Has someone come forward with information about Donna Brazile's role in this?

People for the American Way warns that Republicans are bringing pressure on Senators to confirm President Bush's remaining judicial nominees. It has written this letter(pdf) to Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chair of the Judiciary Committee, suggesting the "Thurmond Rule" be invoked. From the letter:

There is no justification for the Judiciary Committee to accede to demands that it speed up the processing of controversial nominees, particularly at this point in a presidential election year. To the contrary, we believe the time has come for the Committee to invoke the Senate’s longstanding practice, popularly known as “the Thurmond Rule,” of processing only non-controversial judicial nominees during a significant portion of the year leading up to a presidential election. While there has never been a precise date upon which the Thurmond Rule is deemed to take effect, there is ample basis for the Committee to invoke that Rule now.

During much of President Clinton’s Administration, Republican leaders in the Senate blocked the President’s efforts to fill judicial vacancies, particularly on the Courts of Appeals, stranding 60 judicial nominees at the end of the Clinton presidency.2 Through such tactics as secret holds and refusals to schedule hearings or votes, Senate Republicans held judicial vacancies open literally for years in the hope that a Republican would be elected President.

More...

By Big Tent Democrat

It is one of the most interesting phenomenas of this campaign and the Obama camp deserves great credit for this spin achievement - the turning of the pledged delegate count into the Holy Grail of this campaign. Many now pretend that the pledged delegate count was always treated as the ultimate metric for who would be the nominee. I know this to be false. How? Because ALL of us thought that if Barack Obama won the popular vote in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton's chances for winning the nomination would have been over. At that point, even if she had lost New Hampshire, Clinton would have held a lead in the total delegate count and would have been one delegate behind in the pledged delegate count. But she would have been defeated for the nomination. This campaign, indeed NO campaign, did not start with the pledged delegate count as the Holy Grail of this contest. On the flip, I will review some of the contemporaneous coverage so that we can see how the Obama camp succeeded in its spin.

There's progress on the death penalty front to report:

VA Governor Tim Kaine has imposed a moratorium on executions until the Supreme Court decides Baze v. Rees on whether lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment.

Kaine said about 30 executions nationwide have been stayed since September, either by the Supreme Court, lower courts or governors.

In Missouri legislators are considering a bill that would impose a moratorium on executions until 2011 so that death sentences in the state can be reviewed.

Besides the freeze, the measure also would create a 10-person commission to study a random sample of death penalty cases to judge the fairness of the process. The panel could look at topics such as possible racial disparities and the quality of evidence used to convict the person.

More....

Hard to believe the last open thread is already filled. There was lots of talk about what we're watching instead of MSNBC and cable news. American Idol seemed to be a favorite, it's on now.

BTD just signed off for the night -- until I'm done with dinner and can post some substantive stuff, here's a place to continue your discussions -- all topics welcome.

I am completely unimpressed by Howard Dean's statement about seating the Florida delegates today.

Seating the delegates at the convention is not the same thing as allowing their votes to count in picking the party's nominee. Timing is everything. If the delegates aren't seated until the convention in August, it will be too late for them to have a role in choosing the nominee.

Dean isn't saying anything that wasn't said by the party initially -- the credentials or rules committee, at the request of the party nominee, can decide to to seat the delegates. As Florida Democratic Party Chair Karen Thurman said back in January, before the primary:

Florida's 210 delegates will be seated at the national convention in August. U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, honorary chair of the convention; Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean; and former DNC Chairman Don Fowler of South Carolina have all said that, ultimately, the presidential nominee will decide who attends the convention.

Dean seems to be implying that absent an agreement between Hillary and Obama, the delegates won't get to vote because the decision will have to wait until we have a nominee who makes his or her desire known to the appropriate committee.

In order for Florida's 1.7 million votes to really count, the penalty needs to be lifted before the last primary in June. Otherwise, Floridians will have no say in choosing the Democratic nominee. The risk in not lifting the penalty in time for Floridians' votes to count is that they will desert the party in droves in November, either by not voting or by voting for McCain. Who could blame them?

Here's Hillary Clinton's statement about Dean's announcement today:

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

I realize that I have not watched Keith Olbermann's show for a while now. I wonder if it is still the same anti-Hillary fest? I also wonder what people who have not been watching him lately who used to be regular watchers (like I once was) are watching now, if anything. Let me know what you are watching now.

This is an Open thread.

Update (TL):Comments now closed, a new open thread is up for you to continue your discussions.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Josh Marshall writes about the demographics of the Dem race:

The problem is in states with substantial but not particularly large African-American populations in which you have a deep-seated and pre-existing racial politics that ends up playing in Clinton's favor. This, if the theory is right, would explain why Obama does well in the Mountain West and the South but has a harder time in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. . . . But I don't think it adequately deals with all the admittedly small set of data we have. How, for instance, does it account for Obama's victories in Missouri, Maryland, Virginia, Connecticut among other states? . .

This is an issue we have explored in great detail here at Talk Left. For example here. Josh seems unfamiliar with the exit poll data. I am surprised he is pointing to Missouri as the counterpoint, since it actually is in line with the data in other bigger states. Wisconsin (with Virginia) was Obama's best results with white voters in bigger states. More . . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Here is another wrongheaded post from Chris Bowers. He evaluates the unifying effects of the Vice Presidential choice on the effect it will have on supporters of the potential Presidential nominee. Earth to Chris, the people who will need assuaging will be the losing candidate's supporters, not the winning candidate's supporters.

I have to shake my head sometimes. This is an Open Thread. Play nice. J, Chris and I will be out of pocket until tonight.

NOTE - Comments closed.