NJDSC approves 2012 Delegate Selection Plan

by: Babs NJSD

Sat May 21, 2011 at 02:46:48 PM EDT

Last Friday, May 13, 2011 at its annual Conference in Atlantic City, the NJ Democratic State Committee, after a month of public scrutiny and comment, approved the delegate selection plan for the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC. As a member of the DNC's LGBT Caucus, I take particular note that the non discrimination policy specifically is inclusive on the basis of sexual orientation as well as gender identity/expression. (inclusive LGBT) conforming to DNC By-laws and Charter.

The "goal", approved for LGBT delegates, is 8% which translates as of now to 13 delegates plus an appropriate number of alternates and committee members (rules, credentials and platform). Please understand that this is a goal, and not a quota, but provides a wonderful opportunity to be part of the process and be involved in the Democratic Party and help it work for us, equality Americans. Also please note that if NJ moves its primary back to June, it is anticipated that NJ will be awarded more delegates and the numbers will rise. more below...

Grading the Clinton Campaign in New Jersey based on the Atlantic Memos

by: Hopeful

Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:49:38 PM EDT

Not surprisingly, New Jersey as such is rarely mentioned in these high level memos.  As many warned, we got lumped into the big February 5 Super Tuesday.  It's good to see that Mark Penn did value Corzine enough to view his endorsement as a significant April 2007 development, on par with Iowa Governor Vilsack.

After that, the main interest of the leaked memos is in the predictions of the outcome.  On January 21, 2008, senior adviser Guy Cecil included New Jersey in his predictions.  His memo considered New Jersey one of only four Clinton "Base States" and predicted the following primary results (Clinton-Obama):

Vote: 56%-44%
Statewide Delegates: 21-16
District Delegates: 39-31
Total Delegates: 60-47

This was pretty good:  The actual results were 55% - 45%, statewide delegates 21-16, district delegates 38-32, and total 59-48.  

The memo specifically lists Delegate Districts 10 as a 3-delegate district they should target and Districts 16 and 17 as additional targets to pick up delegates.  At first, I thought this was an excellent decision as Clinton picked up +1, +1, and +2 net delegates in those districts.  Clinton got 52% of the vote in NJ10 to pick up an extra district, so that targeting decision was definitely right on.  On the other hand, vote breakdown, Clinton actually easily blew by the thresholds in NJ16 and NJ17, and I can't help but think some effort in District 2, or districts 12 and 18, would have been more valuable.  If I read the 21 January internal targeting projections correctly, Clinton's campaign aimed for the minimum threshold in these districts, when in reality they fell just missed the higher threshold to pick up additional delegates on February 5.

Assessment:  B+: The Clinton campaign predicted the vote within 1% and the delegate breakdown within one.  The three districts Cecil wanted targeted provided a net +4 delegates, most of the Clinton district-level +6 victory margin.  So far so good, but when I look at the district breakdowns I wonder what they were doing in districts 2, 12, and 18, where a few percent more would have picked up additional delegates.  So I give them a B+, but only with the benefit of hindsight.

The Faithful and Unfaithful

by: Thurman Hart

Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:48:52 AM EDT

The party nomination process can be viewed as a variation of a theme.  Although each party determines the nomination process and delegate count independently, it comes down to statewide contests picking delegates who cast their votes based on the results.  And now we have a variation of the unfaithful delegate in the personage of Caren Z. Turner.

Turner began the campaign season as a member of "The Group" - which is, if I may say so - a name that simply reeks of a sense of entitlement.  "The Group" rushed to clear the field for Hillary Clinton, believing that all she lacked was a corronation process for her ascension to the throne.  Having been spanked by the reality of the electoral process, Turner is now publiicly considering switching to supporting John McCain.

It's her right to do so.  She is the one who has to live with her conscience and that, ultimately, is supposed to be what guides our vote choice.  I have to say, however, that her justiications for doing so are quite thin, and some of them are outright based on falsehoods.  More after the jump.

The Delegates of Florida and Michigan

by: Hopeful

Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:12:28 PM EDT

The rules for 2008 seek to give incentives for states to schedule their primaries later in the season.  The key is that these are incentives only, so that if New Jersey moves up to February 5 we will not lose any delegates.  Since our original date was in June, we would receive a 10% bonus for remaining there.  (This is a reward for "good behavior.")  By the way, if we moved back to June from an earlier date, we would have gotten a 30% bonus.

Well, we could have had another 11 delegates if our Presidential election is next week, but that's not the point.  The rules were plain -- even an amateur (me) could understand them.  Since the minimum penalty was 1/2 the delegates, today's decision on Florida and Michigan's delegations is appropriate.  Perhaps New Hampshire, Iowa, and South Carolina should have penalized too, but frankly as a New Jersey voter I have no interest in what order the four early votes go before us.  

Twenty-One Primary Elections on February 5, and that's just New Jersey

by: Hopeful

Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:53:49 PM EST

In Jersey, we've been told there is "a" primary coming up, but there are actually twenty primaries happening on February 5.  Each of these primaries occur in a "Delegate District," which is two of the familiar "Legislative Districts" combined.  For example, I'm in Delegate District Two, which is LD3 (Sweeney's) and LD4 (Madden's) combined.  Each district elects three or four delegates to the national convention. Now the LDs have (roughly) equal population, but the districts that have fewer Democratic voters only get three delegates.  Each of these are truly separate primaries, in the sense that if Hillary Clinton turns out a crushing victory in District 20, it has the same effect in my district as her votes in Los Angeles:  None whatsoever.   There's a total of 70 delegates at stake in these twenty elections.

Note that at the end of the day, outcomes like a 5% win or a 10% win in votes may not be reflected at the district level.  In a three delegate district, I think there are realistically only two possible outcomes:  Either Clinton-Obama-Edwards tie with one each, or one of the them gets two, one gets one, and the other gets nothing.  A candidate gets nothing if "he" fails to get 15% of the votes (I don't think that will happen to "she").   A four delegate district, however, could realistically split 2-2-0 or 3-1-0 or 2-1-1.  As the district results are added up, it's possible that just as in the early states, a small lead by one candidate is not reflected in the delegate totals.  Obama's counterintuitive Nevada result was powered by a small victory in an odd delegate district while splitting even-delegate districts by not losing by too many votes.