2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI cannot believe that so many Bernie Supporters have latched onto the evil Super Delegate meme ...
looking at the Pledged Delegate numbers for the past month or so, the Supers being super is Bernie's only path to the nomination ... and has been since early April!
mmonk
(52,589 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)made a bad decision, force their preference. I don't think they thought of themselves capable of error. However, a convention without super delegates can correct any mistake by vote. So I think it is about power.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)If the people get it wrong a lot of "smart" people can get it right. If you follow that logic to its conclusion we shouldn't have popular elections at all.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)JimDandy
(7,318 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Without the Supers in the calculation, Dems would have had a much lower required number of delegates to win the nomination (like the Reps). Clinton would have sealed up the pledged delegate requirement some time ago.
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)Sanders supporters would post repeatedly about how super delegates were not going to allowed to steal the nomination for Clinton. Now they are saying the reverse when it applies to their candidate.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)democracy like this.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that was Camp Bernie's initial position.
Beacool
(30,251 posts)and give the nomination to the candidate who lags in pledged delegates and the popular vote. THAT's what's wrong. Trying to subvert democracy by expecting the super delegates to give the nomination to the losing candidate. It will never happen.
yellerpup
(12,254 posts)It's because they are Lobbyists. I'm okay with former office holders to be Supers as long as they are not also lobbyists. They should lose their Super powers when they become lobbyists. They can still vote as private citizens.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)yellerpup
(12,254 posts)My personal opinion is that if a formerly elected official becomes a lobbyist they should be disqualified as a super delegate.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Those who are are also DNC committee members, elected in their own states at Democratic Party conventions. Most are elected, current members of Congress, Senators, or Democratic Governors. Each state also has DNC members, who are also superdelegates.
yellerpup
(12,254 posts)and former elected officials and/or DNC members should lose their super delegate status when they become lobbyists. IMHO
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Become a leader in the Democratic Party organization in your state, and maybe you can change the rules. That's my advice.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)At what point does it become influence peddling?
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)There are many lobbyists working to promote all sorts of things I think are good things. There are also lobbyists promoting things I don't like. Which ones are you talking about?
Lobbyist is not a dirty word, in itself. It all depends on what organization is paying the lobbyist to do that lobbying. I'm sure you support many organizations who have lobbyists. I certainly do.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)How many "good" lobbyists are acceptable?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)yellerpup
(12,254 posts)from being super delegates, period. It is not my business for whom they vote.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)I think it needs a rework.
There is something wrong when SD's are lobbyists. Not kosher.
Would you want a Republican SD who was an NRA lobbyist? No, of course you wouldn't.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)You want repubs picking Dem candidates?
Turin_C3PO
(14,047 posts)I would actually oppose the SD's putting him over the top unless he won the popular vote and/or a majority of pledged delegates. It would be hypocritical of me considering I didn't like all of them pledging to support Hillary before a single vote had been cast. Frankly, I hope we get rid of Super Delegates after this election. The idea of them leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)It has evolved to "screw democracy, superdelegates are the only way I can win!"
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)BootinUp
(47,186 posts)I don't have a problem with the current system.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)I loathe them and that they hold 15 % nominating power.
However, thems the rules as we now have it. They are there to usurp the pledged delegate winner in the event the party disagrees with the voice of the people.
LexVegas
(6,094 posts)Gothmog
(145,554 posts)Beacool
(30,251 posts)1) The fantasy that super delegates will switch from the candidate with the most pledged delegates, and also far ahead in the popular vote, to the candidate who lags behind on both fronts.
2) An indictment, that I doubt will ever come down, from the DOJ. Some seem to be keeping their fingers and toes crossed in the hope that Hillary would be forced to drop out of the race.
Foolish me, I thought we were the "Democratic" party, emphasis on democratic..........
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Only a Hillary supporter wants to have a candidate that can't win the primary unless DWS stacks the deck in her favor, she has the corporate master's influence in media and is silent while others suppress the vote.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)thousands of votes cast for your candidate were negated by 1 superdelegate's vote? I hadn't given much thought to the superdelegates before this election, but it doesn't seem like a very democratic way of electing a candidate if the process results in disenfranchising voters.