Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumOne of the Inventors of Superdelegates Explains Why They Were Created: To Stop ‘Outlier Candidates’
Superdelegates were created as a safeguard against nominees like George McGovern, whom Democratic Party officials saw as too far to the left. (Library of Congress)
When it comes to the issue of superdelegates, Elaine Kamarck is a rare triple threat. She was a participant on the 1981-1982 Hunt Commission, which instituted the controversial superdelegate system. She literally wrote the book on the presidential nomination system, Primary Politics: Everything You Need to Know About How America Nominates Its Presidential Candidates. And shes a superdelegate herself, joining the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 1997 and voting at three conventions since.
Those are just a few highlights of a long career that began with a job as research director for the Democratic National Committees 1977 Winograd Commission; Kamarck also helped found the New Democrat movement that propelled Bill Clinton to office and served in the Clinton White House from 1993-1997.
Following the publication of the June cover story, The Secret History of Superdelegates, which examined the transcripts of the Hunt Commission, In These Times spoke with Dr. Kamarck about why superdelegates were created and what she thinks of them today.
The creation of superdelegates seems to have been intended as a corrective to the reforms of the 1969-70 McGovern-Fraser Commission, which took power away from party bosses and provided for the selection of delegates through primaries. Was there a sense that the primary system encouraged nominees who represented the partys extremes?
Those are just a few highlights of a long career that began with a job as research director for the Democratic National Committees 1977 Winograd Commission; Kamarck also helped found the New Democrat movement that propelled Bill Clinton to office and served in the Clinton White House from 1993-1997.
Following the publication of the June cover story, The Secret History of Superdelegates, which examined the transcripts of the Hunt Commission, In These Times spoke with Dr. Kamarck about why superdelegates were created and what she thinks of them today.
The creation of superdelegates seems to have been intended as a corrective to the reforms of the 1969-70 McGovern-Fraser Commission, which took power away from party bosses and provided for the selection of delegates through primaries. Was there a sense that the primary system encouraged nominees who represented the partys extremes?
Snip
http://inthesetimes.com/article/19141/one-of-the-inventors-of-superdelegates-explains-why-they-were-created-to-st
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
12 replies, 602 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
12 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
One of the Inventors of Superdelegates Explains Why They Were Created: To Stop ‘Outlier Candidates’ (Original Post)
LiberalArkie
May 2016
OP
They really wanted to stop that RFK, McGovern, McCarthy etc from ever happening again.
LiberalArkie
May 2016
#2
They did not like Teddy running later on. The TPTB had already picked Humphrey but I don't
LiberalArkie
May 2016
#9
If we get rid of super delagates (I think that is the direction we are going in) then we must
upaloopa
May 2016
#3
That would definitely eliminate all but the wealthiest from competing in the primaries for sure.
LiberalArkie
May 2016
#4
And it costs a billion dollars to run for POTUS...but hey NOT a plutocracy...no no...
Rex
May 2016
#8
Democrats who support this line of thinking deserve all the political misfortune
Maedhros
May 2016
#10
would that include a presumptive nominee with an FBI indictment recommendation against her?
AgerolanAmerican
May 2016
#11
Well, in all fairness HRC has not been indicted and convicted so she has not been found at fault
LiberalArkie
May 2016
#12
LexVegas
(6,094 posts)1. Was it Tad that said that?
LiberalArkie
(15,728 posts)2. They really wanted to stop that RFK, McGovern, McCarthy etc from ever happening again.
Yet in 1980, part of the acrimony of the nomination fight was that Kennedy wanted all delegates to be unbound and vote their conscience.
Believe me, people change their mind on these rules questions all the time depending on what their politics are. He was basically arguing in the 1980 convention that all delegates should be superdelegates and that the primaries shouldnt matter. But that was because they thought they could break loose Carter delegates if they were unbound. It didnt happen, but that was the strategy. Theres no ideological consistency there. Its all about power politics.
One of the main goals of the Hunt Commission was to make the Democratic Party a winning party again. But in 1984, Mondale was the overwhelming choice of the superdelegates, and he ended up losing in another landslide. Does that mean the creation of the superdelegates was a failure?
Believe me, people change their mind on these rules questions all the time depending on what their politics are. He was basically arguing in the 1980 convention that all delegates should be superdelegates and that the primaries shouldnt matter. But that was because they thought they could break loose Carter delegates if they were unbound. It didnt happen, but that was the strategy. Theres no ideological consistency there. Its all about power politics.
One of the main goals of the Hunt Commission was to make the Democratic Party a winning party again. But in 1984, Mondale was the overwhelming choice of the superdelegates, and he ended up losing in another landslide. Does that mean the creation of the superdelegates was a failure?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)6. Maybe they wanted to stop McGovern.
The beloved brother of the martyred president would have ran a very competitive campaign. Nixon was scared shitless of facing Robert Kennedy.
LiberalArkie
(15,728 posts)9. They did not like Teddy running later on. The TPTB had already picked Humphrey but I don't
think he won anything but caucuses. I don't think he won a primary. Sure didn't win a general.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)3. If we get rid of super delagates (I think that is the direction we are going in) then we must
accept responsibility for the outcome of the general election.
The most talked about change I have heard is to have four regional primaries, all be voting, all open and no super delegates.
LiberalArkie
(15,728 posts)4. That would definitely eliminate all but the wealthiest from competing in the primaries for sure.
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)5. how about DNC chair...
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)7. Dog forbid the Peasants have a say. To hell with Democracy.
Onward Oligarchy.
Rex
(65,616 posts)8. And it costs a billion dollars to run for POTUS...but hey NOT a plutocracy...no no...
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)10. Democrats who support this line of thinking deserve all the political misfortune
that results from it.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)11. would that include a presumptive nominee with an FBI indictment recommendation against her?
Asking for all my friends and countrymen
LiberalArkie
(15,728 posts)12. Well, in all fairness HRC has not been indicted and convicted so she has not been found at fault
for anything. And being a fair political organization, if the parties nominee ends up not to be able to run for office, then the race becomes between Trump and Stein.