This coming Saturday, May 31, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee meets to determine the fate of Michigan and Florida at the Convention. The delegates on the Committee have been told to arrive and Friday and not make plans to leave till Sunday.

Florida and Mi will be seated on some basis, the question is how. Maybe it will be the results of Fla with each delegate getting a half vote. That wouldn't work in Mi because Obama got no votes there. It is possible, however, they'll give him the uncommits, which was 40%. It could be that Fla goes in as 57-33 Clinton with full votes and Mi goes in 60-40 with full votes.

There are 30 members of RBC, thirteen of whom are announced for Hillary. Eight have announced for Barack. The two co-chairs have said they won't vote unless there's a tie. To get from 13 votes to 14 (to create a tie) or 15 (to win) Hillary needs two more votes. There are seven uncommits theoretically, but not really. Donna Braziele is an uncommit and she's obviously a Barack supporter. One uncommit is fro Mi, one from NY and one is the Hispanic representative on RBC.

Whatever ruling is made lasts till late June, when jurisdiction passes to the Credentials Committee of the Convention. Whatever decision is made there will then go to the floor on an up or down vote on the majority report and minority report. The Mi and Fla delegations will have representation on both the floor and the Credentials Committee but can't vote when their own state is challenged. However Mi gets to vote on the Fla challenge and vice versa.

Should be a wild show.

The day after the RBC vote, Sunday June 1, Puerto Rico votes in its primary (changed from a caucus). Last time PR voted on anything two million people showed up at the polls. To put that in perspective, that's more voters than any state in the 2008 primary season except for mega-states California, NY, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. Fifty-five delegates will be awarded, plus eight supers, for a total of 63.

By the way, the RBC also gets to vote on whether Fla and Mi supers get seated, but that's a foregone conclusion because the DNC sanctions only apply to pledged delegates.

Hillary is expected to win huge in PR,maybe 60-40. If she does, she will gather 400,000 net popular votes and the quibbling over the popular vote will be over (because Mi and Fla will be in on some basis so their popular votes will count.

SD and Montana will vote two days later, on June 3 and the voting season will be over. Obama will win both states, net about 20,000 votes and a handful of delegates.

As of June 3, the voting contest will be over. Hillary will have won the popular vote which will include all 50 states and PR, Guam and VI whether caucus or primary. Obama will be leading in the delegate count but the number necessary to win the nomination will have increased based on the RBC decision to seat Fla and Mi on some basis.

Stay tuned!

Lawpol --

Good analysis, but you are wrong with regard to the Supers. DNC sanctions apply to all delegates -- not just to pledged delegates.

Further, it is wrong to conclude that HRC will get the support of all her nominal supporters on the Rules committee for her position (especially her extreme position -- in which she wants all the delegates from Michigan, including those who represent voters who voted against her; and in which she wants no penalty for the early voting at all). The members of the rules committee are loyal members of the DNC first, Clinton supporters second (with a few exceptions).

As Chuck Todd pointed out -- the best result would be one that penalized the Party leadership in MI and FL without penalizing the voters. This can be accomplished by stripping MI and FL of its superdelegates -- and then seating the pledged delegations based on the voting (with Obama getting the uncommitted vote from MI). This is unfair to Obama; but it accomplishes the Party's goals. Alternatively, the Rules committee could agree to seat the pledge delegations if they receive concessions from the supers from MI and FL - such as "we will seat the pledged delegations as HRC wants if the supers commit to vote for Obama at the convention." This is risky, but workable.

Beathan

Suppose the MI and FL delegations are seated and Hillary Clinton is allocated 55% of the MI delegates and 65% of the FL delegates with the rest going to Barack Obama. That scenario will give Clinton a net gain of only 60 pledged delegates. So Obama still wins the race for pledged delegates by a margin of about 100.

Obama 08!

If Florida and Michigan only receive slaps on their respective hands, the 2016 primary campaign (I'm assuming that President Obama will be renominated without a challenger in 2012) might just start in 2013. The lesson that the states will have learned is that they can set up whatever primary system that they want with minimal punishment from the parties. The Democratic Party barely exists as it is; now it will not even serve the function of regulating the primary calender. The stranglehold that Iowa and New Hamshire have on the process will be broken, but chaos will ensue.

To put that in perspective, that's more voters than any state in the 2008 primary season except for mega-states California, NY, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. Fifty-five delegates will be awarded, plus eight supers, for a total of 63.

Yes, lets put that in perspective. Among the other frauds commited by Clinton is the counting in the popular vote of a territory whose citizens pay no federal taxes, and who have no vote in the general election. Add to this the disenfranchisement of the caucus states (where turnout tends to be low by design, and where in many cases popular vote totals aren't even kept) and the counting of a huge number of votes in Michigan, where Obama was not on the ballot, and you have a real convincing case for Clinton having won the popular vote. Everyone will be quite impressed, I'm sure.

To count the popular vote in Puerto Rico is ludicrous! To keep making this popular vote argument is ludicrous!

Either "ALL" the votes count or they do not.

I find it fascinating (in a horrible sort of way) that the HRC campaign continues to make these arguments out of both sides of the mouth. "Count all the votes we want or risk being just like 2000." Duh - that WAS 2000!!

Well, it will soon be over and that's good.

"The two co-chairs have said they won't vote unless there's a tie."

That makes no sense. Why would two voters be reserved to break a tie? Why wouldn't they go ahead and vote to begin with? It's just silly. I could see the point of reserving one voter as a tie-breaker.

Dear lawpol;

Sorry to be redundant from my related reply to you, but your analysis is way off.

The week will predictably unfold something close to the following:

The current difference between Obama's pledged & super delegates and 2,026 is about 50 (Obama claims fewer.) Clinton picks up about 25 this Saturday unless Obama already has his superdelegates lined up and charitably gives her more. In the primaries (she wins Puerto Rico big, Obama wins Montana & South Dakota.) Thus, Obama picks up another 35 or more.

Before next Tuesday, Obama rolls out 20 more. He then needs 30 after the primaries. (Less than 20% of the remaining superdelegates.)

Most of the remaining supers are waiting for the June 3 primaries to end so they can announce for the pledged delegate winner while giving Hillary her due, as they promised to do, e.g., Brazil, Pelosi, Carter, and most of the rest follow like a wave since they cannot overturn the delegate winner and they want this to stop.

Over June 5.

Sorry, lawpol, but that's the way it is. If she wants to take it to the convention, she'll never get a bill out of the Senate for the rest of her life.

Time to unite. Have you heard about that maniac McCain?