Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:05 AM May 2016

I 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!

38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I cannot believe that so many Bernie Supporters have latched onto the evil Super Delegate meme ... (Original Post) 1StrongBlackMan May 2016 OP
What is the purpose of the super delegate invention? mmonk May 2016 #1
To stymie the will of the people? DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #3
I was thinking to influence an election and if they thought the people mmonk May 2016 #7
Isn't that the purpose of the Electoral College ? DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #14
You could say the electoral college but in a more removed way. mmonk May 2016 #15
In the GE, but not in the Primary. n/t JimDandy May 2016 #37
Ask Tad Devine, he created it. JaneyVee May 2016 #8
you mean back when he was Emperor of the Democratic Party? virtualobserver May 2016 #30
so now that they can switch from Hillary they are "evil" ? GreatGazoo May 2016 #2
Actually the idea they can switch is Bernie's only hope. I think suddenly they are not so evil. Sheepshank May 2016 #4
Months ago they were considered evil KingFlorez May 2016 #9
This. Sad to see them try to subvert... scscholar May 2016 #32
No they were evil up UNTIL they could, possible ... might, hopefully ... switch 1StrongBlackMan May 2016 #19
No, what's "evil" is Sanders' strategy that they should ignore the will of the people Beacool May 2016 #31
It's not so much that Super Delegates are evil. yellerpup May 2016 #5
The Supers are mostly elected officials or formerly elected officials DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #16
Thanks, I understand. yellerpup May 2016 #24
Very few of the superdelegates are lobbyists. MineralMan May 2016 #18
Current elected officials cannot be lobbyists yellerpup May 2016 #25
That's your opinion. MineralMan May 2016 #27
How many lobbyists influencing the election process is acceptable to you? Android3.14 May 2016 #34
Well, it depends what the lobbyists are lobbying for, really. MineralMan May 2016 #36
Tell you what, let's assume I've identified the "good" lobbyists Android3.14 May 2016 #38
Will they be less lobbyists, if they switch their support? 1StrongBlackMan May 2016 #22
I'm only interested in barring lobbyists yellerpup May 2016 #26
Okay. 1StrongBlackMan May 2016 #28
Personally pinebox May 2016 #6
Thats why open primaries suck... JaneyVee May 2016 #10
Not all of us. Turin_C3PO May 2016 #11
"Democracy good, superdelegates bad" is no longer operative. Nye Bevan May 2016 #12
Eliminate the Super part of Super-Delegates and who is STILL ahead? 1StrongBlackMan May 2016 #23
They can express their preference, but they have little power to change the results BootinUp May 2016 #13
The super delegates are undemocratic and should be axed from our nomination process. morningfog May 2016 #17
I can. nt LexVegas May 2016 #20
I am amused by the attacks on super delegates Gothmog May 2016 #21
They have latched on to two things. Beacool May 2016 #29
I can't believe your still peddling that anti-democracy swill Android3.14 May 2016 #33
If the votes for the candidates were reversed, wouldn't it bug you that Vinca May 2016 #35

mmonk

(52,589 posts)
7. I was thinking to influence an election and if they thought the people
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:36 AM
May 2016

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)
14. Isn't that the purpose of the Electoral College ?
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:40 AM
May 2016

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.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
4. Actually the idea they can switch is Bernie's only hope. I think suddenly they are not so evil.
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:26 AM
May 2016

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)
9. Months ago they were considered evil
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:36 AM
May 2016

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.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
19. No they were evil up UNTIL they could, possible ... might, hopefully ... switch
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:00 PM
May 2016

that was Camp Bernie's initial position.

Beacool

(30,251 posts)
31. No, what's "evil" is Sanders' strategy that they should ignore the will of the people
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:42 PM
May 2016

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)
5. It's not so much that Super Delegates are evil.
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:34 AM
May 2016

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.

yellerpup

(12,254 posts)
24. Thanks, I understand.
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:29 PM
May 2016

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)
18. Very few of the superdelegates are lobbyists.
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:58 AM
May 2016

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)
25. Current elected officials cannot be lobbyists
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:32 PM
May 2016

and former elected officials and/or DNC members should lose their super delegate status when they become lobbyists. IMHO

MineralMan

(146,329 posts)
27. That's your opinion.
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:34 PM
May 2016

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)
34. How many lobbyists influencing the election process is acceptable to you?
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:53 PM
May 2016

At what point does it become influence peddling?

MineralMan

(146,329 posts)
36. Well, it depends what the lobbyists are lobbying for, really.
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:58 PM
May 2016

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)
38. Tell you what, let's assume I've identified the "good" lobbyists
Thu May 5, 2016, 02:00 PM
May 2016

How many "good" lobbyists are acceptable?

yellerpup

(12,254 posts)
26. I'm only interested in barring lobbyists
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:34 PM
May 2016

from being super delegates, period. It is not my business for whom they vote.

 

pinebox

(5,761 posts)
6. Personally
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:35 AM
May 2016

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.

Turin_C3PO

(14,047 posts)
11. Not all of us.
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:38 AM
May 2016

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)
12. "Democracy good, superdelegates bad" is no longer operative.
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:39 AM
May 2016

It has evolved to "screw democracy, superdelegates are the only way I can win!"

BootinUp

(47,186 posts)
13. They can express their preference, but they have little power to change the results
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:39 AM
May 2016

I don't have a problem with the current system.

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
17. The super delegates are undemocratic and should be axed from our nomination process.
Thu May 5, 2016, 11:55 AM
May 2016

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.

Beacool

(30,251 posts)
29. They have latched on to two things.
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:38 PM
May 2016

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)
33. I can't believe your still peddling that anti-democracy swill
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:51 PM
May 2016

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)
35. If the votes for the candidates were reversed, wouldn't it bug you that
Thu May 5, 2016, 12:55 PM
May 2016

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.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»I cannot believe that so ...