GovCorzine is definitely pointing us in rightDirection. Clearly, no agreement on FloridaMichigan "delegates" can be reached, however, allCandidates were clearly on equalPlayingField in Florida (although Obama did cheat a bit w some adv). Therefore, since SuperDelegates are evaluating popularVote and pledgedDelegates, following factors would seem fair:
1. ignore Florida delegates completely
2. include Florida popularVote in grand accumulation of popularVote for totalPrimaryVote
3. weight the pledgedDelegates according to the votesCast inthe state. This would even out current discrepancy of number of actualVoters whom each delegate represents. As a result each state would be weighted by totalVotesCast in that state divided by totalVotesCast nationwide. The number of "calculated pledgedDelegates" from each state would equal this fraction times apprx 3251 which is about 80 percent ofThe 4049 totalDelegates to theConvention, which leavesThe 798 superDelegates intact. Therefore, ifa state had 50 delegates, but its fraction of popularVote times 3251 only came out to 40, then its 50 pledgedDelegates would collectively cast only 40 votes.
4. when viewing totals regarding "pledgedDelegates", always include weightingFactor so that people could see and evaluate how many actual voters those pledgedDelegates represent. So, above example would report as 50(40-voted) pledgedDelegates, always keeping the value in parens for ref.
5. ignore Michigan delegates.
6. consider Michigan popularVote only as last resort since playing field there was not equal.
Since the SuperDelegates are not required to act on any specific piece of info, this data would only be regularly be reported so as to be factored into their consideration.






Posted April 6, 2008 | 08:00 PM (EST)