Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democratic delegates are chosen Proportionately

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 10:32 AM
Original message
Democratic delegates are chosen Proportionately
There seems to be some confusion about the delegate selection process for Democratic delegates to the National convention. Although Republicans have a winner take all system, Democratic rules state that delegates are chosen proportionately. There is a 15% threshold however.

Keep this in mind when you think about second or third place.
A strong second or third in both Iowa and New Hampshire could set up someone really well on the Feb. 3rd round of primaries ( a lot more delegates chosen than in NH and IOWA )

----------------------------------------------
Here are two pages with some information:

The Democrats delegate selection rules, which run 18 pages, set out not only the timing of delegate selection but the process. The rules require proportional representation (as opposed, for example, to a winner-take-all process) and establish a 15% threshold for obtaining delegates. They also require state parties to produce affirmative action plans so as to encourage participation and representation of African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans and Asian Pacific Americans in the delegate selection process.

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/dncrb111001.html

and

this older page which gives a timeline of the rules changes that started in 1972 with McGovern.

Beginning with reforms proposed by the McGovern panel, the Democratic party "democratized" the presidential selection process through a succession of commissions between 1968 and 1992. This series of changes succeeded in 1) crafting rules to guarantee better representation for women, young people and minorities; 2) secured PROPORTIONAL ALLOCATION of delegates, based on state primary or caucus results (eliminating winner-take-all allocation of delegates); and 3) gave convention votes to party leaders and elected officials (they are nicknamed SUPERDELEGATES and are allowed to remain uncommitted until the convention).

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/conventions/chicago...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
1. I amazed at the people here at DU that still think the DNC picks
the delegates. (Or even the DLC!)

I posted similar information several months ago. The thread got 1 or 2 posts and dropped off into archive oblivion.

I would suggest people also check with their state parties for rules specific to their state. The selection process does vary from state to state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I plan on kicking this several times
because I think a lot of people are putting too much emphasis on New Hampshire and Iowa. For example, if Dean wins NH with 20% of the vote, but Edwards gets the same 20% in South Carolina, Edwards will be ahead in the delegate count because SC is so much larger.
( This is a very simple example, and I know it, but readers get the drift )

Also a candidate could come in second ( heck even third if the numbers are right) in a enough states and actually win the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PAMod Donating Member (651 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. New Hampshire & Iowa are huge because...
Gephardt must win in Iowa & Kerry and Lieberman must win in New Hampshire or their support elsewhere will go bye-bye. They would be relegated to compromise status at the convention (though I suppose a lot of "stop Dean" people would push them forward regardless.)

Edwards & Clark are really the only ones who would benefit from your first scenario.

If Dean wins 20% in NH and that is the "winning" total - he will get a big bump in SC.

Regarding your second scenario, that could very well happen, but many of the neophytes would be disgusted and we would likely lose badly in November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Feb 3
Don't forget that South Carolina is not the only primary on Feb. 3. The February 3 primary states are:
Arizona
Delaware
Missouri
New Mexico
North Dakota
South Carolina
Oklahoma

Also, I know it may be considered ridiculous to suggest but if Kucinich finishes amongst the top three in Iowa, Missouri, Arizona & New Mexico he will be in the race at least all the way to the convention.

Note where he is "announcing" his candidacy next week:

OCTOBER 13
Cleveland 12:00 - 1:50
Detroit 2:50 - 3:30
Manchester 5:20 - 6:00
Madison 8:00 - 8:40

OCTOBER 14
Albuquerque 9:00 - 10:35 a.m.
Austin 1:30 - 2:10
Oklahoma City 3:40 - 4:20
Minneapolis 6:20 - 7:00
Chicago 8:35 - 9:15

OCTOBER 15
St. Louis 8:30 - 10:20 a.m.
Des Moines 11:50 a.m. - 12:30

http://www.kucinich.us/pressreleases/pr_100603.htm

Kucinich has the advantage of lower expectations of media and pundits.
As this thread makes clear, Iowa and New Hampshire are all about meeting or exceeding expectations. February 3 will be just as important and of course March 2 will cement a frontrunner (or runners?). Fractured convention is not really that remote a possibility although I assume establishment candidates will capitulate if they are not leading going into it. I suspect there will be several candidates remaining going into the convention although one or two should be heavily favored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I've got a spreadsheet with state-specific info on it
Alabama http://www.aladems.org/delegateselection.pdf
Alaska
Arizona http://www.azdem.org/election/delegates/The%20Model%20P...
Arkansas http://www.arkdems.org/plan/Arkansas%20Delegate%20Selec...
California http://www.ca-dem.org/delegate_info_2004.php
Colorado http://www.coloradodems.org/2004%20Delegate%20Selection...
Connecticut http://www.dems.info/Articles/TheModelPlan.doc
Delaware http://www.deldems.org/De-DelegatePlan-2004.pdf
Dist. of Columbia
Florida http://www.fladems.com/docs/2004DNCDelegateSelPlan.pdf
Georgia
Hawaii http://www.hawaiidemocrats.org/Documents/Hawaii%20DSP%2...
Idaho http://www.idaho-democrats.org/content/The_Model_Plan.p...
Illinois http://www.ildems.org/delegateplan2004.doc
Indiana
Iowa http://www.iowademocrats.org/filemgmt/visit.php?lid=9
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine http://207.21.240.115/mdp/2004_delegateselectionplan.pd...
Maryland http://www.mddems.org/MD_Delegate_Selection_Plan.pdf
Massachusetts http://www.massdems.org/body/plan.htm
Michigan http://www.mi-democrats.com/content/2004%20DSP%20Summar...
Minnesota
Missouri http://66.241.237.166/www/The%20Missouri%20Delegate%20S...
Mississippi
Montana http://www.mtdemocrats.org/images/pdfs/delegateselectio...
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire http://www.nhdp.org/model.pdf
New Jersey http://www.njdems.org/PDF/2004%20Delegate%20Selection%2...
New Mexico http://www.dpnm.org/vertical/Sites/{6F24BE72-13E5-4CA6-...
New York http://www.nydems.org/news/archive/2003_09_000083.html
North Carolina http://www.ncdp.org/PDF/delegate.pdf
North Dakota http://www.demnpl.com/vertical/Sites/{69334758-1697-4DC...
Ohio http://www.ohiodems.org/ncenter.htm
Oklahoma
Oregon http://www.dpo.org/news/documents/1666.pdf
Pennsylvania http://www.padems.com/delegateselectionplan1.pdf
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee http://www.tndp.org/getinvolved/04primary/04delegates.p...
Texas http://www.txdemocrats.org/IssuesPlatforms/2004revisedd...
Utah http://www.utdemocrats.org/04UTPLAN.pdf
Vermont
Virginia
Washington http://www.wa-democrats.org/delegateselectionplan.pdf
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

States that don't have a URL in front of them don't have a Delegate Selection plan that I know of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJerseyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. New Jersey selection plan
That link doesn't seem to work for me. That may be an old link since they came out with a new plan in September so maybe you have one from before.
Anyway, here's a different link.

http://www.njdems.org/delegate.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I haven't checked those links in a while
I'll probably update them in a few weeks.

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loyal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. So how do I become a delegate?
Edited on Tue Oct-07-03 04:42 PM by Loyal
Do I go around collecting signatures in my congressional district. Goobergunch, do u know? Anyone? Btw, I'm in New York.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. According to the New York plan...
Fewer than 1,000 signatures are required to place the names of delegates and alternates on the ballot in each of the States 29 Congressional Districts.

Petitions may be circulated no sooner than November 26, 2003 and filed no earlier than December 29, 2003 and no later than January 2, 2004.

Candidates for delegate and alternate pledged to a presidential candidate are subject to approval by that candidates authorized New York representative.


Unfortunately, the NY party didn't put their full plan on their website, but you can probably contact the state party for more information.

Good luck!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
10. Which makes me wonder
if some of the 'long-shot' candidates are hoping to pick up enough candidates to become a 'power broker' at the convention.

Is that possible? If it came down to the wire could one of the candidates throw their delegates to another in exchange for a veep spot, etc.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Aug 27th 2014, 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC