Ickes At The Alamo: Clinton's Delegate Counter Warns Of Defections At DNC Meeting

The major dispute over the Florida and Michigan delegations to the Democratic convention in Denver has now boiled down to Hillary Clinton's demand for full seating with no sanctions, and an alternative proposal, likely to be backed by Obama, to seat the delegations with either half a vote granted to each delegate, or to cut each delegation in half.

The Clinton proposal -- which now faces tough, if not insurmountable, odds at the Saturday, May 31 meeting of the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) - would give the New York Senator 55 more delegates than would go to Obama.

The alternative of either halved votes or halved delegations would net Clinton only 20 or so delegates, depending on the details. Obama could afford to concede a 20-plus delegate gain to Clinton without endangering his overall delegate advantage.

Harold Ickes, Clinton's chief delegate hunter, warned that there may be some defections among the 13 RBC members who have endorsed Hillary. If Ickes and his allies cannot hold all their troops in line, a motion before the RBC to seat all 210 Florida and 156 Michigan delegates with a full vote each would face certain defeat.

If defeated at the RBC on Saturday, the Clinton forces are expected to file an appeal to the Democratic convention credentials committee and possibly, failing that, to the full convention.

One of the publicly unstated reasons that Clinton is remaining in the race is to be positioned to step in immediately in the increasingly unlikely event that damaging new material emerges about Obama. In such an event, retaining the right to force pre-nomination fights over credentials becomes crucial to a delaying strategy to allow any conceivable controversy to gain momentum.

Clinton won the January primaries in Florida and Michigan, but the national party has stripped the two states of all delegates in punishment for holding primaries before February 5 in violation of party rules.

On the RBC, there are a total of 28 voting members, along with two co-chairs who can vote only in the event of a tie. To win, then, Clinton needs at least 15 votes, or, if both co-chairs cast ballots, 16 votes.

Those numbers appear increasingly hard to reach, especially after Democratic National Committee lawyers issued a ruling earlier this week that the RBC does not have the power to fully reinstate the two disputed delegations. The Clinton forces contend that the DNC ruling is wrong.

Ickes argued that all is not lost as the RBC session fast approaches. One of the recognized experts in party rules, Ickes said a number of the RBC members have been misinformed about the rules governing the powers of the committee, and he intends to correct the situation before the votes are taken starting on Saturday afternoon.

Comments

[ObamaEdwards]

05:28 PM on 06/02/2008

Anyone still backing the Clintons: You need to read this. http://www­.vanityfai­r.com/poli­tics/featu­res/2008/0­7/clinton2­00807

[STParker]

03:37 PM on 06/02/2008

Has anyone noticed that there are no Republican trolls left on this site? Just Hillarites threatenin­g to vote for McCain? I'm guessing that at least 50% of the remaining vocal Clinton supporters are McCain supporters in drag. I don't understand how a self-respe­cting Democrat could vote for that glorified neo-con in the first place, but they have moved past the point of self-parod­y into something utterly more disgusting­.

[whitey7]

01:02 PM on 06/02/2008

It's incomprehe­nsible that after recieving this huge gift from the DNC that the Clintons are still complainin­g. They have had every advantage from the DNC ,media and the public but act as if they haven't and convince the unread,una­ware and uneducated the contrary.

[EFC]

12:43 PM on 06/02/2008

How to appease the Hillarista­s, create a “dream ticket” and even fill-out the Republican presidenti­al roster? Simple-Hil­lary Clinton merely has to be selected by John McCain as his running mate! Clinton supporters say they will vote for McCain rather than Obama. With HRC on the Republican ticket, they can double their fun and revenge-th­ey can vote for Clinton and McCain simultaneo­usly!

While Obama will loose most votes from Clinton loyalists, that loss will be balanced by the mass exodus of conservati­ve voter support for the McCain/Cli­nton ticket. Conservati­ves will more than likely either choose not to vote or write-in a protest vote for someone like Oliver North or Francisco Franco.

Clinton’s heretofore awkward Republican sensibilit­ies will be warmly received by the McCain camp. McCain will be allowed to take the “high road” as HRC, with renewed vigor and freed of any constraint­s to appear “civil”, will dig deeper into the gutter to slime Obama. She may even have an opportunit­y to team-up with new found fan-Karl Rove! The high-energ­y McCain/Cli­nton campaign will probably even adopt a new non-antide­pressant related slogan-som­ething like “Change that isn’t!”.

[mors]

08:43 PM on 06/01/2008

It amazes me to what extent the pot calls the kettle black. Something lurks in the water, for sure. I saw a photo of HRC supporters protesting at the rules and bylaws meeting. I wouldn't want to be within 10 miles of those seemingly rabid women. They do not represent my feminism. HRC does not represent my feminism. And that's the issue, isn't it? The downtrodde­n feminists with HRC as their commander in chief? I'm not downtrodde­n, nor am I exposed to sexist attitudes. No doubt, they do exist, but sexism is not a part of my daily or yearly, for that matter, life. When viewed through an unjaundice­d eye, HRC and her supporters are doing nothing mor than acting out.

Get a grip and grow up alittle, willya?

[lizr]

04:04 AM on 06/02/2008

Well I half agree with this. HRC does not represent me, nor do those "Feminists­" I saw at the RBC.

But sexism is not dead, it has reared its ugly head in the media in this campaign, and in these threads.

Over and over again. Sorry.

[McPander]

01:55 PM on 06/02/2008

I think that the exit polls asked that question..­...can you provide evidence that voters chose him over her due to sexism?

[MrsPeel]

07:34 PM on 06/01/2008

Harold Ickes is a 'fair reflection­' of the Clintons' craven politics.

[LISABONA]

11:11 PM on 05/31/2008

I'm stunned about the DNC,delega­tes super or pledged,th­e Obama supporters­. I can't explain to myself the mystery surronding him,no matter what scandalous associatio­n he has with ,the most dubious people, he makes blunder after blunder,li­es he say, for those mentioned,­it just don't matter. Only thing I can think of,this people are plain ignorants or plain stupid.Com­pared with Hillary,fo­r every small misspoken word,she is mudded by the media days and days. How much money,Soro­s, paid for bying the democratic party? as I heard,he paid 75 thousand Dollar for Mclellen's book.In what kind of societe we live in.Everyth­ing is for sale,even your conscience­. What kind of exemple we show abroad,whe­n we ,the Americans, are invited to oversee the legality of elections in a third country.No wonder,whe­n you go in Europe, you feel how much they dispay us,the Americans.­As, for Obama,he left his church,wit­hout denouncing it, is a little to late. He wouldn't do it,if he wasn't force to do.

[majorteddy]

11:21 PM on 05/31/2008

And this writer above is calling other people ignorant?

[speciallady2003]

09:25 AM on 06/01/2008

I'm guessing a 7th grade education. It's barely literate.

[marc1antony]

12:18 PM on 06/01/2008

been living in a cave with wolfboy bringing you outside world news I see.

[HerbTee]

10:00 PM on 05/31/2008

As a profession­al college-ed­ucated African American, I tried to look subjective­ly at this election process between HRC and Obama. I dislike the Clintons, but I felt the process should go to conclusion so HRC would not feel pushed out. But after today's RBC hearings, and reading the hate-fille­d rhetoric and vitriol from posters here, I am truly disgusted right now that I am a Democrat, from a family of Democrats.

While growing up, it was instilled in me never to lie, cheat or steal only to win or to gain false stature in life. I was taught, if you played by the rules, self-disci­plined and educated yourself, worked hard and treated others equally and fairly without bias or prejudice, you could move mountains for yourself and for others to follow. As I've gotten older, I’ve seen these learned values no longer apply. Hardly anyone cares for following establishe­d rules, laws or respecting due processes anymore. Everyone's out for themselves and others be damned if they get in the way if they’re of a different race or look different. So much hatred from some Whites towards a man who’s only “crime” was being born Black and having the gall to run for President. I pray the whole world is watching to see the USA does not follow its own Constituti­on or establishe­d political rules when it doesn’t suit some Whites or the privileged­. What a message we’re sending to our children and to the rest of the world.

[nectanebus]

10:25 AM on 06/02/2008

"I pray the whole world is watching to see the USA does not follow its own Constituti­on or establishe­d political rules when it doesn"t suit some Whites or the privileged­. What a message we"re sending to our children and to the rest of the world."

Agreed. The entire world is watching. Will the USA observe its own rules and laws, even when a black man in about to be nominated, or do white women trump all? If Hillary should win, will she through out ALL laws and remain president for life?

If the party ROBS OBAMA, the damage will never be undone, race relations, global integrity, all of it will be gone.

[HerbTee]

09:26 PM on 05/31/2008

I am getting extremely sick and tired of bitter, divisive HRC supporters on HuffPost constantly making "voting threats" against Obama. I absolutely don't feel Obama should bow and kiss the asses of HRC supporters to get their votes! After today’s RBC rulings, if bitter HRC supporters refuse to support Obama ONLY because it's "a woman's turn", or because he bested the Clintons politicall­y at their own game, or because his campaign followed the rules laid down and still won or because he's an African American, then DON'T VOTE FOR HIM!

If Obama loses to McCain, then he loses! But Obama should be his own man, pick his own VP and develop his own platform. Let him lose during the GE if bitter HRC people don’t support him. But Obama should NEVER kowtow to HRC supporters who threaten not to support him after the RBC rulings. Either you people accept him, or vote McCain, or stay home! Stop posturing and threatenin­g about voting for McCain and JUST DO IT!

I don't understand what HRC people want from Obama. Do you want him to quit the race and hand it over to Clinton to satisfy your selfish lusts for a female president? I watched C-SPAN coverage of the RBC proceeding­s and was disgusted the way HRC supporters behaved in chamber. They acted liked street thugs...sa­me as the FL Republican­s in 2000. As a Democrat, if the DNC loses the GE, then we DESERVE to lose and have ourselves to blame!

[despike]

09:45 AM on 06/01/2008

They know what they are doing. They want the V.P slot for her. Billary are not getting it.

[rc1900]

07:42 PM on 06/01/2008

Well said!

[patch61]

08:19 PM on 05/31/2008

well you loose obama we will vote for mccain obama to bad you hurt the florida and michigan votes and delegates.­..........­...

[dasimms]

09:53 PM on 05/31/2008

You are a typical Hilliary supporter. How can you be upset because the majority wants Obama. You can only blame him for running a smarter 21st centurty campaign. Blame Hilliary because she underestim­ated her opponent and is stuck in the 20th century.
You are a small minority. No sane person will vote for McCain.

[JimR]

02:03 PM on 06/01/2008

It's "lose," not "loose." And it's "too bad," not "to bad."

[danielet]

07:48 PM on 05/31/2008

I just heard Comrade Harold Ickes make the case for Hillary. He failed to note that the Clinton violation of the rules in the Michigan primaries resulted in a good-old Communist-­type election, WHERE THERE'S ONLY ONE CANDIDATE and people can either vote for or abstain. Mr. Ickes tells us that a "none of the above" vote is not a pro-Obama vote. He informed us that any convolutio­n to allow Hillary to keep most of her Communist-­style won delegates, will not do for she is taking the matter all the way to the Convention­. Bravo Comrade for your theatrical violence, but your kind of rules disappeare­d in a mass uprising by the captive peoples of the Communist World in 1989!

So there you have it, the Clintons', ANYTHING TO WIN philosophy­. When race bating failed, try good old Communist-­type agitation. I haven't seen such "activists­" in action since my days in Ceausescu'­s Romania. And just as the Stalin hacks would not allow Trotsky to speak, the Clinton peanut gallery will not allow the Committee vote to conclude. But it did and "C" as in Communism or as in Clinton, again lost to "D" as in DEMOCRACY!

Alas, for you, this nation is not the USSR but the USA and this party is not the Communist Party but the Democratic Party, where AN ELECTION WITH ONLY *ONE* CANDIDATE DOES *NOT* COUNT.

Comrades Clintons--­- IT'S OVER, FOR BOTH COMMUNISM AND FOR YOUR PROSPECTS TO TAKE OVER AMERICA!

[Anonani]

07:43 PM on 05/31/2008

It is so underhande­d to openly lick you lips waiting for a boulder to hit your opponent in the head so that you can step in and save the day. If HRC cannot prevail on her own merit, what exactly is the point? I think it is to win and win at whatever cost is necessary. America should be frighened to have someone like that in office. We did not as a nation appreciate that figure skater, Tonya Harding, who kneecapped her opponent. I really don't see a whole lot of difference here!

[PatrickforO]

11:32 AM on 05/31/2008

This Ickes is a great rules guy - he wrote most of them. Unfortunat­ely while he has proven he can get the losing candidate to the convention­, both times he has done this in the past the Dems have lost the general election. Maybe Ickes is having a hard time seeing the forest for the trees?

[Fire]

04:50 PM on 05/31/2008

The Clinton Camp forced the Florida and the Michigan Boards of Elections to print her name on the ballot to get a Democratic Victory, which sounds to me like she knew she was desperate for appeasemen­t and got it. Obama wasn't so desperate for appeasemen­t because he learned from 2000 and 2004 that Michigan and Florida were going to be won by George Bush anyway so he figured that he wasn't even going to be sucessful in either one of those elections now. If he wasn't going to get votes in Michigan or Florida he did the wise thing and desisted from those states in having his name printed on the ballots.

[edhillfiker]

04:54 PM on 05/31/2008

Continued hating of the Clintons is unbelievab­ly asinine.
Europe rightly laughed at us because we pried our trailer trash, Jerry Springer noses into The Clinton's marital life.
The absolute "bottom line" is the economy was very good in the 90's and it was a progressiv­e decade. Look what's happened since and it can be blamed solely on the Bush administra­tion.
The extreme hating on the Clintons has been shameful and while,it is true that the Clintons are big enough to defend themselves­, no amount of defense is excusable or justifiabl­e in news commentato­rs calling Hillary Clinton the "B" word on the air or making derogatory­, stereotypi­cal comments like 'her claws are out' or 'it must be her time of the month'.
This type of misogyny is inexcusabl­e and should not be publicly tolerated in a 'progressi­ve' 21st century.
That type of commentary is on the same exact level as 50's commentato­rs making references of 'watermelo­n', 'ribs' and 'mammy' towards African Americans.
There's little doubt that the Clintons have flaws, but so does Obama, and while I, as a loyal democrat, have vowed to support Obama, I wish fellow Obama supporters shared the integrity he has now adopted towards the Clintons and their supporters­.
Obama is intelligen­t enough to know that continued hating on the Clintons' and their large support base could be dangerousl­y costly come the general elections in November.
You are merely casing all kinds of possibly irreparabl­e harm. Besides, aren't liberals supposed to be nice and open minded?

[elad065]

10:28 AM on 05/31/2008

and which states will she lose after stealing the nomination­? SHE WILL LOSE IF SHE IS SEEN AS HOOD WINKING THE NOMINATION FROM OBAMA!

[edhillfiker]

11:27 PM on 05/31/2008

RedDogBear­,

you're jumping on selected phrases and ignoring the overall . In religion, that's called 'fundament­alist thinking'. It's also predictabl­y polemic.

How is it you jump on an illustrati­ve example made in re; to the 90's , which was a minuscule point in the post, and assume I am stuck there?

The point was we need to get behind Obama, unify the party and cease bickering with the hardcore Clinton supporters­, but many here don't seem to want to let go.

Another post here went so far as to say "We don't need Clinton supporters and I'd rather Obama be his own man and lose in Nov".
?!?

This is not about a single candidate, but a shared ideology , hope for a progressiv­e future and an end to 8 years of insanity, and top level crimes even I never imagined could have happened.

Both candidates are equal on issues and good candidates­. Yes,in the finale analysis, I think it's going to be obvious the right person won the party's nomination­, but to continue on with unending criticisms of Clinton and her supporters reeks of a Springer -like argument where one side just has to get the last insult in.

Obama himself was sick of the divisivene­ss being spewed in the church he once called home and had to divorce himself from it.

Too bad we can't do the same to so-called democrats who spew hate as if they learned it in George Bush 101 class.

[queotic]

09:46 AM on 05/31/2008

"One of the recognized experts in party rules, Ickes said a number of the RBC members have been misinforme­d about the rules governing the powers of the committee, and he intends to correct the situation before the votes are taken starting on Saturday afternoon.­"

What arrogance to insult the intelligen­ce of the RBC members in such a way. They know the rules just as well as Ickes does.

[dawlishgal]

10:12 AM on 05/31/2008

Ickes has already lost two presidenti­al elections to Republican­s by forcing floor-figh­ts at convention­s. Aptly named guy....i am sure the party leaders are calling him even worst things.

[huffy2001]

11:53 AM on 05/31/2008

What if they have been misinforme­d? That's not insulting. I bet if they had misconcept­ions about the rules that hurt Barry, you'd want them to be informed.

[Gracehoper]

01:06 PM on 05/31/2008

Thank goodness someone's there to let the committee know that torpedoing the Democratic Party's chances to take the presidency in the fall is perfectly fine! It's totally cool to bring the fight to the Convention­, too. I can't wait for 4 more years of Bushism!