Christine Pelosi: Superdelegates Should Not Overturn Majority Dem. Vote

[babylonsister]

Christine Pelosi: Superdelegates Should Not Overturn Majority Dem. Vote
Sam Stein


Christine Pelosi, daughter of the Speaker and (more notably at the moment) a superdelegate, warns of a massive disillusionment of voters should Democratic Party officials back a presidential nominee that didn't win the popular vote.

"Many of us are elected by the grassroots of the party," she said, "And I cannot imagine going home in November to those people and try to phone bank for someone who did not capture the popular vote... We were all galvanized by what happened to Al Gore in Florida."

Pelosi, who has been a DNC member since 1996 and recently authored the book "Campaign Boot Camp," acknowledged being petitioned heavily from campaign surrogates but declined to say whom she would support. She did, however, list different attributes upon which her superdelegate vote will be based: "Who is building a base of volunteers, who is bringing the party together - the best indicators of future performance."

In her interview with the Huffington Post, she spoke freely and at length about some of the challenges facing the 796 superdelegates as the presidential nomination seemingly falls into their laps. What, for instance, should the party do about the primary elections in Michigan and Florida, which did not, according to DNC rules, carry any delegates, but which the victorious Hillary Clinton campaign is hoping to have counted?

"Of course they should be involved. I can't imagine a scenario personally where they are not. The question is how?" said Pelosi. She then playfully suggested a novel idea: splitting the state's delegates 50/50 to Obama and Clinton. It would, she argued, allow for representation from each state while not changing the dynamics of the race in one candidate's favor. Of course, she added, "Ideally we sit back and let the process do its will and by the time you get to June it won't matter."

In a separate interview Friday with Bloomberg TV, Christine's mother, Nancy Pelosi, went a step further, arguing that the Florida and Michigan primaries shouldn't decide the party's nomination. "I don't think that any states that operated outside the rules of the party can be dispositive of who the nominee is,'' Pelosi told Al Hunt. She also addressed the power wielded by the super-delegates, dismissing concerns that they vote against the will of the majority of Democratic voters.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/15/christine-pelosi-superde_n_86836.html

[tyne]

1. From what

I've been hearing, Hillary doesn't stand a chance in hell of getting FL or MI seated as she wants.

[griffi94]

2. sure they should

isn't that exactly why they have the unpledged delegates to begin with......
i thought they were there so party officials and party movers & shakers would have some control over the process.....it was to avoid a mob rule kind of mentality...just like what we see here in 08.......obama will get crushed in the general election....the crossover repubs who fueled his impressive numbers won't be there for him in nov.......he's only had huge numbers in open primary states......i'd rather the sd overturn the mod rule than let the repubs pick our candidate.......the superdelegates are there for exactly this.....they need to go for hillary

[islandmkl]

3. uh...yeah....right...

why waste time, effort and money on primaries and picking a candidate? Let's just send all the super-delegates to some tropical resort and let them let us know who our candidate is. F****** old-school DINOs need to be removed from the Party power-structure...give us back OUR PARTY!!

[Tarc]

4. How many times are the O-Bots going to post their superdelegate whine?

And its from the same people, over and over, not even newbies. Jesus, give the "thou shalt not" bullshit a rest already, will you? Every time this comes up I think I'll just cut n paste from the journal to save time;

This BS has got to stop: If the superdelegates go the other way, it is not "stolen"
Posted by Tarc in General Discussion: Primaries
Sun Feb 10th 2008, 03:04 PM
I want to vomit every time I see this ridiculous fucking meme. Those 796 have every right to vote one their own, and should not be cowed into voting for one or the other based on the result of the pledged delegate results.

The vast majority are elected officials, current and former, who were capable of making sound decisions on their own as members of Congress, the Senate, as Governors, as Mayors etc...

Do we demand that our elected officials take a poll of their constituents on every bill, every motion, every amendment, every earmark? No, we do not. Why do some feel that their role as superdelegates should now suddenly be beholden to the direct will of the voters?

I'm personally for Clinton, and if she went in to the convention with a lead, and the supers went Obama's way, then so be it. This is how the process has been for 30+ yeas, and all this crying and feet-stomping at the 11th hour is abso-fucking-lutely pathetic.

It'd be like a team losing the Super Bowl in overtime, and bitching about the "sudden death" rules if they never get a chance to get the ball.

Summation: suck it up. Stop embarrassing yourselves and your candidate.

[tyne]

5. Tarc

needs to get a grip.

I don't believe for one minute that Hillary supporters would be fine if Hillary went into the convention with more states...more votes...and more delegates...yet the SD's gave it to Obama.

Not one minute. Not even a second.

[Tarc]

6. I would be, as I am grown-up enough to know that's how the primary actually works

It is unfortunate that you lack the maturity to say the same.

[Stuckinthebush]

7. I doubt that

You would be screaming like Obama supporters are screaming.

It is very undemocratic. The whole super delegate mess was created so the party establishment could maintain some level of control over the voters. Yes, it works the way it was meant to work but a super delegate situation that overturns the popular vote is a sign of a party that is out of touch with the voters. If Clinton wins the popular vote, then Obama super delegates shouldn't overturn that vote either. It's a great way to disenfranchise the party rank and file.

[Tarc]

8. It is not undemocratic, and don't be a jackass telling me what I think ,goddamnit.

I feel there are valid reasons to have the superdelegate system in place, and I have commented on numerous times on this board over the weeks. But don't for a second sit there and tell me what I think, bud. That isn't something I will stand for. Ever.

[islandmkl]

9. Yes...'valid reasons'....

like the rank & file can't be trusted to do the 'right' thing 'for the party'....f****** elitists...they should head on over to the GOP where they REALLY fit in...they could try to bring change to the GOP instead of keeping the DEMOCRATIC Party held-in-place by old power-mongers with arbitrary & archaic 'rules'...when was the last time there was any organized Democratic activity even remotely involving the rank & file that endorsed any of these horseshit rules?

I'm sure there is an answer I'm not aware of...provided by one of the resident geniuses who think this super-delegate apparatus is just fine...who I am sure found the answer on the internet...not because they, or anyone they personally know, participated in any rules adoption convention.

[Tarc]

12. You aren't trusted in the general elections either, y'know

Electoral College much?

If you don't like it, then then go Green or Libertarian or whatever tickles your fancy. I don't like having states that hold inherently undemocratic caucus systems, or ones that allow independents and Republicans to vote in the Democratic primaries whenever they please, jsut by swapping their names to one form or another.

Until such things like those are rectified, then giving 20% of the delegate count to the party leadership to keep such tomfoolery in check is quite a good idea.

[Stuckinthebush]

11. You jackassed first

But I stand by my statement:

"I doubt that"

I'm betting you are one of many well intentioned supporters who are engaging in a bit of rationalization of a patently non-democratic system within the democratic party. It's all good. I understand the desire to do this because we all believe that the Democratic Party is about democracy. In the end, it's a club and that club determines its rules. You'd be correct in saying that super delegates have a right to cast their votes anyway they wish. I'd stand behind you and agree. But there are many who say that it is acceptable for super delegates who are high powered party members to overturn the popular vote. Simply put, it's not if one is for the democratic process.

[John Q. Citizen]

10. I agree with the Polosis on this. I have long argued that the SDs will get in line

based on the the vote of the people.

I have also thought for the last 3 days that the race will be functionally over on march 5th based on mathematics.

Either Clinton will have opened the Red Sea and turned the tide completely in her favor, or she won't, in which case Obama will be the presumed winner and Hill will have to suck it up and do what's good for the party and the country. Or she will watch a two week erosion of institutional support that will lead to the same consequences.

It's still just and fair (if somewhat painful) that Hill have her shot at a miracle turn around. I don't see it, but campaigns have often continued under worse conditions, and most of them lost also. Hill has suddenly become "a little bit populist" (kind of like 'a little bit country') and who knows, maybe she can pull that off. John McCain must be a source of inspiration to Hill's campaign. Here he was a nationally known candidate for Pres, and his campaign was out of money and polling horribly, and he came back to be the mathematically assumed winner. Of course he had more time than Hill does, and the tide still seems to be running in Obama's favor vis a vis Hill.

Every Dem candidate is watching, because to a very real extent their own political careers are tied up in this political spectacle of historic proportions, and I'm sure they aren't blind to what everyone else can see in terms of what Christine Pelosi said about "Who is building a base of volunteers, who is bringing the party together - the best indicators of future performance."

People remember how badly Dems faired under the last Clinton administration. In fact, the party rift over Howard Dean as DNC Chair also lines up as a Clinton vs The Roots-Party kind of squabble, with long time Clinton Camp people such as James Carvelle and the DLC attempting to undermine Dean and his '50 state contest-all-elections build-the-grass-roots' strategy. Students of history will remember that the DNC under Clinton operated on a 15 state strategy for Presidential elections, where by they put all their resources and attention into a 15 electoral college win, and ceding all the other states.

In a very real sense this Democratic Presidential Primary election has played out as a real life test case for two different theories of politics. One theory is that by organizing and mobilizing a mass movement, ceding nothing, and paying attention to people who are rarely if ever taken seriously that you can achieve presidential power.

The other theory of politics is that only certain key states and constituencies actually matter, and by focusing on those key constituencies one can achieve presidential power.

The first example is by far and away more of a populous approach, the second relays more heavily on consultants and power players, though both sides use freely from each others tool kits.

So that's what this election is really about. It's about the prevalent theory of politics of the Democratic Party. And at this point it seems the populous theory is sweeping the nation. Even Hill has stuck her toe into the populous message. It's in some ways reminiscent of the recent changes in Latin America and other parts of the world just in terms of it's underlying message of change from the bottom up.

I'm confident that our superdelegates get this, at least superficially and as far as personal political survival goes.

It's a new day, any way you slice it.