Posted on 01/05/2008 11:24:42 AM PST by doug from upland
The Tyranny of Super-Delegates
Barack Obama's stirring victory in Iowa was also a good night for our democracy. The turnout broke records and young people – who were mobilized and organized – participated in unprecedented numbers. And now that Iowans have spoken – the first citizens in the nation to do so – here's the Democratic delegate count for the top three candidates (2,025 delegates are needed to secure the nomination):
Clinton – 169
Obama – 66
Edwards – 47
"Huh?" you say. "vanden Heuvel, you made a MAJOR typo."
In fact, those numbers are correct: the third-place finishing Sen. Hillary Clinton now has over twice as many delegates as Sen. Obama, and more than three times as many delegates as the second-place candidate, Sen. John Edwards. Why? Because the Democratic Party uses an antiquated and anti-democratic nominating system that includes 842 "super-delegates" – un-pledged party leaders not chosen by the voters, free to support the candidate of their choice, and who comprise more than forty percent of the delegates needed to win the nomination. Many have already announced the candidate they will support.
In a clear attempt to protect the party establishment, this undemocratic infrastructure was created following George McGovern's landslide defeat in 1972. It was designed to prevent a nominee who was "out of sync with the rest of the party," Northeastern University political scientist William Mayer told MSNBC. Democratic National Committee member Elaine Kamarck called it a "sort of safety valve."
In 1988, Reverend Jesse Jackson challenged the notion that these appointed delegates be permitted to vote for the candidate of their choosing rather than the winner of the state's caucus or primary. He was right to do so. Twenty years later, when the word "change" is being bandied about, isn't it time for the Democratic Party to give real meaning to the word? Strengthen our democracy by reforming the super-delegate system so that the people, not the party establishment, choose their candidate.
My assesment also. A brokered convention will galvanize the Republican party and with Thompson leading the ticket, disenfranchised Dems will swing his way. Hillary will in effect, cut her own throat. Blair
“Imagine the shit that will hit the fan if the Super Delegates carry Hillary to a narrow win.”
It only hits the fan if the media decides it’s an issue, and if the Clinton’s win, it won’t be, REST ASSURED AT THAT...
If she who must not be elected, wins by cheating and getting super-delegates, then I’d love to see Obama stick it to her by going 3rd party - he’d get more than Perot did in 92 by far. And in the meantime, while the dems are beating each other to a pulp, republicans will broker their convention. I sure wish we had a “job description” handed out to everyone on the President’s job. Republicans need to get a grip and stop whining about every single candidate. There is NO Reaganesque type in this race - get over it already. This name calling on Free Republic is just childish - if you don’t like a candidate, fine, but these nicknames are beneath intelligent conversation which I used to believe existed on this website.
I was stumped on how it could be done. Now that you explain it, it makes all the sense in the world.
Not fair, you could at least get a couple of nice wallets out of a rattlesnake.
I think the problem is that many who vote "D" are not paying attention, and only absorb what they're being spoon-fed by the wrong sources. If they were told that Republicans used this system and that it was bad, they'd be screaming about Bush 'shredding the Constitution.' OK for the Dems to do it, though...
I made this same point earlier in opposition to the Dick Morris column writing Hillary off for dead. Nice to see the press catching up with me.
“He fails to mention Hillary still holds the gonads of the DLC. She is ahead in the delegate count even with Iowa. Superdelegates not elected in state primaries are mostly DLC or DLC proxies.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1948668/posts?page=22#22
for later
bump
Unlike 1984, this time the Democrats have the Internet too. It could well be an issue.
haven’t heard that name in almost a dozen years... anyone figure out who hired him???
Ping for later read/reference.
if the super delegates steal the nomination in Hilda von der Schliekmeister’s favor, it might send a nice chunk back to the party of Lincoln, at least the ones that don’t worship the mailman and on the sixth of every month (on my job) ask me for a few bags of Caesar parmesan shrimp and caramel cappucino cups...
IDK, if Satan and Jesus are brothers to mormons, then to anyone that knows anyting about Arkansas politics, because both are populists and from Hope, Huckabee and Bubba are brothers...
Wow!
I Feel so much better right now.
Kudos to you.
I had heard the term before, but was not familiar with the functionality. Still, what is the main difference between the dems superdelegates and the unpledged delegates the GOP has?
As of the 2008 nominating cycle, the Republican Party does not have superdelegates. It does, however, have 463 unpledged delegates, 123 of whom are Republican National Committee members.
Woo hoo—let the chaos begin!
I know what I read. Be more clear in the future and these things won’t happen.
I think you need be more careful about making sweeping conclusions about peoples motives based on a few lines of text. There was nothing in my post that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that I was a Clinton supporter. Lighten up and hold yer water.
bump for later read...
She’s gonna blow ... When the nutroots find out, ashtrays won’t help.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.