Superfallacy

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

"We need superdelegates to protect the Party from people electing someone who might be unelectable in the GE."

The concept is an anti-democratic joke. And it's the reason the Clinton campaign can milk the "Oh-just-you-watch-cause-Obama-might-implode-any-day-and-the-superdelegates-will-vote-for-HRC-to-save-the-party!" bullshit meme.

Thanks, superfallacy, for bringing unnecessary doubt to a contest that mathematically is over. There's no making up a 150 pledged delegate lead at this point--not without help from the landed gentry.

[joshcryer]

1. Thems the rules.

Obama supporters hatin' on the rules.

Typical. :)

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

2. I can't gaurantee it, truth be told, but I hope I'd be hating on 'em if it were the other way around

[Shakespeare]

3. If you're such a stickler for the rules, then you surely must have no problem with MI and FL....

...delegates not being seated at the convention.

Them's the rules, after all.

[Arkansas Granny]

9. I've thought all along that those rules need to be adhered to as well.

I don't know how the DNC would ever be able to enforce rules about primary dates in the future if they back off of the rules that were broken. If the whole primary system needs an overhaul then it needs to be done before the next election cycle, not in the middle of this one.

[Shakespeare]

10. I agree completely.

They intentionally broke the rules. I think they HAVE to be enforced, and the only parties who deserve blame are the respective state party leaders who insisted on defying the national party.

I also agree on the need for primary reform. I'd love to see a national primary instead of this quirky, state-by-state contest, where every state has a different set of rules.

[damntexdem]

4. It's just setting us up for SuperdelegateGate.

And that's a scandal we just don't need.

[BlueIdaho]

5. Superdeligates

were set up by party bigwigs who knew they would miss the good old days of smoke filled back rooms. But then - Democrats have lost more elections than they have won since getting rid of those cigar chomping fat cats running the show - so who knows...

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. Maybe the dems would not have lost those elections

if the fat cats had actually backed the peoples' choices, instead of fighting them.

Imaginge (takes some real imagination) the DLC backing Dean in 04, instead of undermining him. We'd have been following his 50 state strategy all along, and had a margin of victory over * that could not have been cheated.

DLC and superdelegates are only there to keep the power out of the hands of the Democratic electorate.

[BlueIdaho]

13. Excellent Point nt

[theredpen]

6. The superdelegates are the party gatekeepers

But "electability" is not the only criterion that they are supposed to use.

The superdelegates are supposed to look after the interests of the Democratic Party. Party unity and the loyalty of the base are also crucial.

Furthermore, the "electability" metrics all suggest that Obama would be a stronger candidate. But, alas, metrics are numbers and we know that Clinton supporters are allergic to numbers.

[DJ13]

7. It IS a phallacy

Created by a bunch of d*ckheads.

[AllentownJake]

8. Ahem

When most polls have you polling further behind than your primary challenger in the GE...I don't understand why that is your talking point.

[Mooney]

11. Didn't the superdelegates pick Walter Mondale in 1984?

Or am I mistaken?

[anonymous171]

14. Great pick!

SDs tend to choose party insiders over newcomers. That's the problem. They help continue the oligarchy of power that runs the Democratic Party.

[redqueen]

16. "They help continue the oligarchy of power that runs the Democratic Party."

That is what they are intended to do, yes.

However, every individual gets to make their own decision on how to use that power. :D

[anonymous171]

17. That's why I was happy to hear Pelosi's statement about "following the will of the voters"

Probably one of the first pro-active things she's done in a while.

[Mooney]

18. Did the SD's pick Mondale or not though?

I honestly don't know and I'm seeking clarification. I cannot make the pithy, devastating critique that I intend to make if my facts are wrong.

[anonymous171]

19. Yeah they did.

That's what happened in 1984, when Senator Gary Hart launched an insurgent challenge to front-runner Walter Mondale. Hart won sixteen state primaries and caucuses to Mondale's ten, and barely lost the popular vote. Yet Mondale locked up virtually all the party's 700 or so superdelegates even before the primary began. Hart likely would have lost anyway, but the superdelegates sealed his defeat. "I got almost none of them, because was considered inevitable," Hart told me.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080218/berman

[Mooney]

20. Thank you.

That's fucking funny. The one grim hope that HRC has is that the SD's pick her, in which case she'd be following in the grand tradition of Walter Mondale.

Walter Mondale is a fine guy, but I think if you're running for president, you want to do exactly NOTHING the way he did it.

[anonymous171]

21. I was reading about that election the other day and I couldn't help but laugh.

Seriously, Mondale got OWNED in that election. It was an embarrassment to the Democratic Party. We need to learn from our mistakes. People who provide inspiration (even though Reagan was horrible.) beat those who do not.

[redqueen]

15. I think you have that right.