I don't know what's going to happen here. But to me personally, the examples in the appendix clarify the meaning of the delegate selection rules beyond reasonable doubt
-
-
Show this thread
-
The example--shown in the piece--very clearly awards satellite SDEs in direct proportion to county delegates, without regard for turnout. This interpretation would cost Sanders a net-3.8 delegates--enough to decide the race under many realistic conditions
Show this thread -
There's some room for debate in the text of the delegate selection plan, just bc it's arcane junk. But the example at the end is clear.pic.twitter.com/uut78dv8gT
Show this thread -
And the delegate selection plan, as I understand it, is the controlling plan that the IADP submitted to the DNC. The FAQ, though certainly reflecting the IADP interpretation, may not be relevant if it's in conflict with the delegate selection plan
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
a serve of an article iconic thank you
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The joke is over. Throw the SDEs away. Award Sanders and Pete both the same delegates, say they tied, and move the hell on
-
Agreed
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How How can they not even be consistent in the application of their own rules? Do they not know their own rules?
-
It is amazing. But it is very different and way more complicated than previous caucuses. The answer to make caucuses more accessible is to end them.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 1 more reply
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.