Of course, as you seem to suggest, Charley, the other 30 could be divided proportionately based on how Clinton and Obama did in the first primary.

Personally, I think that might be unfair advantage to Clinton. She's the only one who campaigned in the state, isn't she?   (After the candidates agreed not to.) If she got only 50% in spite of that advantage, why would one think it fair to give her a greater of the votes that were cast for someone other than her?   I think it would make more sense to split those other delegates down the middle. (Not the delegates themselves -- OWW! -- just their votes.)