The alleged Super Delegate problem

[FSogol]

I work in an office with about 20 democrats and a half dozen repubs. Everyone I come in contact with that discusses politics believes that the Super delegate issue will be a huge problem for the Democratic Party. Even this board is filled with worries that the Super delegates will cause someone's prefered candidate to lose, destroy the party, or usurp the votes of the citizens. Hogwash. I can't see this happening. My case:


1. The super delegates are politicians and will wish be be on the winning side. Many of then hold off on endorsing until the end, so they endorse the winning candidate.

2. Remember that many of these delegates are people you respect, like Dennis Kucinich and Al Gore. Do you think they will usurp the process to hand the election to one of the candidates?

3. While many of the delegates are in Hillary's camp, many more will join Obama, especially if he keeps winning.

4. The whole super-delegate "problem" is a fabrication of the M$M to further fracture the Democratic party. Watch as it becomes a non-issue as the primaries continue.

Conclusion: The candidate that gets the most votes will win. The super delegates, except for the 30% who are bound to one candidate (like Bill Clinton), will move to and endorse the candidate that gets the most votes.

My 2 cents (not adjusted for inflation)

[NoBorders]

1. You're probably right.

Those remainin uncommitted will simply hold off until a clear winner is apparent.

[tyne]

3. I think

you are spot on.

It's pobably much ado about nada.

[RethugAssKicker]

2. I don't like the fact that they have the power to override...

Whether they do it or not is not the point... It is undemocratic and elitist
that they can!

[Not Me]

5. Those are the rules.

After this thing is over, I can guarantee that Dean will be looking at changing them.

[Independent-Voter]

13. 1/5 of the total delegates is absurd. They need to ditch the SD system altogether

but keep the proportional voting so candidates will actually campaign in all states. Hillary's horrid campaign is a textbook case of how just campaigning in the large states is a good way to get your ass handed to you.

[hogwyld]

14. Not if Clinton wins it

Dr. Dean will be out as DNC chair to be replaced by Terry McA once again.

[anamandujano]

21. Those that apply stringent rules to Florida and Michigan seek to

overturn rules that may not favor them.

[NWHarkness]

11. How can they override?

They just vote, like any other delegate.

Here's a thought. Elect progressive Democrats as your governor,senator, congressman, state chair, etc., and you'll have progressive superdelegates.

[MediaBabe]

18. Gosh! You mean we are responsible?

You are a breath of fresh air. Imagine! Someone who actually understands that the outcome is in the hands of the people and it starts at home in the local elections. I wish everyone would see that voting once every four years is too little, too late.

[NWHarkness]

19. Thank you!

Some of us work at building the party and moving it in a progressive direction every month of every year. And every 4th year, hordes of people, who couldn't bother to participate 3 years out of 4, turn up and sneer at us for being "party insiders".

There is no good reason why the majority of DUers are not on their local or town committees.

[Orsino]

22. If only we could have a progressive nominee.

But worrying over which corporatist our corporatist superdelegates will choose is nearly pointless.

[gasperc]

4. media and clinton's and maybe GOP want to make this an issue

Obama is pulling away with pledged delegates. Hillary is not out of it, with WI, TX, OH and PA looming all winnable by Hillary. Hillary has an anvil wrapped around her neck named Mark Penn. The guy is cancer.

Whether or not the GOP wants Hillary to be the nominee or not, I don't know and I'm not sure I care. They want to weaken the Democrat as much as possible that's for sure. Hillary looks like she would help the GOP down ticket. At the very least they want to avoid a total blowout that will cripple them for teeing up for 2010 and 2012.

So our job is this, work activly for the candidate that we support. Keep bringing more democrats into the fold and reach for the clouds in November sweep in 300 dems in the house and 65 dems in the Senate. Then let the GOP worry about teeing up in 2010. We'll have cushion.

[Tarc]

6. Every day brings a new regurgitation of the "usurp" meme

I will keep saying this til the convention is over and done with; if the superdelegates vote differently than the pledged delegates do, nothing has been "usurped". This is how the Democratic Party primaries are designed.

You don't get to whine halfway trough a game that you no longer like the rules.

[FSogol]

9. Did you read the post? Where is the whining?

The super delegates will not vote differently.

[Tarc]

10. Really, Ms. Cleo? You know that for a fact?

They can vote differently if they choose to, and what you stated for "reasons" why they will not is really nothing more than fanciful wishing. Much like the Obama campaign in general.

[NWHarkness]

12. Funny how that works

If you're a superdelegate from a state Obama won, and you vote for Clinton, you are an undemocratic usurper.

If you are a superdelegate from a state Clinton won, and you vote for Obama, well then, you are just doing the right thing.

[pampango]

15. The SDs can vote however they want to. They will have all kinds of pressure and

many considerations. They will probably consider what they think their constituents want, what the candidates want (and can promise them), who they think will be best in the GE and others.

I don't think that any of us "know" what will motivate individual SDs. We each are entitled to our own opinion what they "should" do, but the fact is they are free to vote however they want and we are free to react to that however we want.

We don't control the SDs and they don't control us.

[FSogol]

16. I stated an opinion. I did not whine. I am not advocating for any candidate.

I recommend a brushing up on your reading comprehension.

Have a nice day. :hi:

[RethugAssKicker]

17. Then if they won't vote differently....WTF have SD??

It serves no purpose, given your argument... Think about it.

[Independent-Voter]

20. If the Supers override the voters, the Dems can kiss the GE goodbye

Really - just drop this idiotic system you guys have. What a moronic way to potentially override the intent of your voters.

[MediaBabe]

24. "...this system *you guys* have..."

"You guys"? Who are you and what are you doing here if you aren't one of us?

The easiest way to understand the reason for super delegates is to do a tiny bit of research. TEN MINUTES ought to be enough. I suggest Wikipedia for a short synop of the why and what for. Ten minutes or even less to understand why. Think you can spare it?

[anamandujano]

23. Add to that, voters have chosen their pledged delegates, the supers

should not have to be just another pledged delegate.

It's their choice to either stick their fingers in the wind to decide or follow their hearts and souls. Why change rules mid-stream, as the whining goes.

[Independent-Voter]

7. I agree - this is going to be a non-issue in the end

[pdxmom]

8. Thom Hartmann has been talking about this quite a bit on both his

national show and on his local show here in Portland. He says the DNC has basically two jobs it does...it works to get Dems elected and it works to make sure it continues to exist to get Dems elected. He believes that the DNC will have a sense of their own survival and that the superdelegates will go the way of the leading candidate, to make sure that the party survives. He believes the supers will not be an issue when it all comes out.