In The Politico, Clinton ally Lanny Davis proposed a "compromise" on the Democratic delegations from Michigan and Florida, which he describes as "more generous to Obama than to Clinton."
Here's his deal: in Michigan, give Clinton the 73 pledged delegates shewould have won if the primary were legal. Then, of the 55 delegatesthat are pledged to "uncommitted," "divide the remaining delegatesapproximately 50-50 between the two of them, 28-27 (giving Clinton theextra delegate since she led in all the latest statewide polls.)"
So she gets the delegates represented by everyone who voted for her when she was the only major candidate on the ballot, and then more than 50% of all the people who voted for anyone but her!
Brezhnev should have thought of this.
On Florida, what he describes as a "compromise" is simply to seat the delegates as if the primary were valid. Which is a perfectly reasonable case (I'm for it), but can't be called a compromise.
This actually goes beyond Harold Ickes' reported demand that the uncommitteds remain uncommitted and not be counted for Obama. But for months, the case that Clinton made for the legitimacy of the Michigan primary was that Obama was effectively on the ballot, and the votes for "uncommitted" represent his support.
(Davis argues that "some of those 50 delegates [that is, their supporters] might have been for Clinton as a second choice to candidates other than Obama, so it would be totally unfair to award all 50 delegates to Obama." True, but some of the 73 Clinton delegates might have been for Obama as a first choice but didn't see his name on the ballot.)
I've met Lanny Davis only once, when he was lobbying on behalf of Howard Stern in the 1990s. I always assumed that took a lot of chutzpah, but it was a mere warmup for this.
--Mark Schmitt.
