[candidate-development] Delegate allocation

[Yarden]

Dave,

Not only do I agree, but I repeat that it alters my forecast only in  
that it adds 1 more to McKinney and 1 less to No preference after the  
initial release by non-candidates at the convention itself.  I am  
fully aware that this is not supposed to be the basis of our technical  
correction function, but I do not know who will be made unhappy by  
McKinney ending up with an additional pledged delegate, when 20 remain  
for cultivation by other 'official GPUS candidates' such as Johnson,  
McKinney, Mesplay, Swift.  We may even get some Massachusetts  
organizing this spring.
Elie YArden
CDLC



On May 10, 2008, at 3:19 PM, DvEngland at aol.com wrote:

> I think this fits the technical correction category.  The  thrust of  
> the memo
> remains the same.
>
> Dave
>
>
> In a message dated 05/10/08 3:08:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> jandrews166 at gmail.com writes:
>
> Dave,
>
> Do you want the CDLC to approve this revision, or do you  consider  
> it to be a
> technical correction that the CDLC co-chairs are able to  make?  In  
> any
> event, I vote to approve the revised letter.
>
> I think  getting this settled and getting notifications out is a
> time-critical priority  at this point.
>
> - John
>
>
>
>
>
> **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on  
> family
> favorites at AOL Food.
> (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
> _______________________________________________
> candidate-development mailing list
> candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development