Posted on 03/08/2018 6:46:51 PM PST by cba123
The measure would go a step beyond the Clinton-Sanders Unity Commission proposals to change the superdelegate system. An “absurd and undemocratic idea,” one DNC member said in a memo to party leaders.
(please see link for full story)
(Excerpt) Read more at buzzfeed.com ...
Superdelegates is a highly screwed up process. Much as I think this was part of why Trump won the election, it is terribly wrong, as a way to choose a candidate.
My opinion, anyway.
This is a major blow to “senior” candidates who have accumulated a lot of backing over the years. Like Hillary, although I think her opportunity has gone, because no Dem thinks she can win.
Superdelegates are a hallmark of totalitarianism.
Just like leftists want.
Hillary had more than 100 because we even knew sanders was for real.
Will elimination of the super delegates result in most of the delegates coming from the far left of the party? I always think of the super delegates being older, more mature
and more moderate-all in relative terms to the hard left which seems to be taking over the Democrat party.
Democrats Are Considering Dropping Superdelegates
This was originally put in to stop far lefty candidates because the party was so wacked out.
Then we should hope the socialists keep their superdelegates.
Democrats Are Considering Dropping Superdelegates.
Hillary wouldn’t have won the nomination without the super delegates. Without them she would have never gone over the top.
I don’t care what they do, but they should not let non-party members run; such as Sanders.
“Democrats Are Considering Dropping Superdelegates Altogether”
I agree. LANO. From 3,000’, no parachutes.
Why? The Democrat Party is not a public organization. It is an association of like-minded folks. But, the association has published rules and regulations and the folks who join are subject to that. The super delegates are part of that. Their job is to make sure that the candidate that the Democrat Party feels is most likely to prevail in the general election will be the nominee. While I like the Repub system better, the Dems are always about control (of government, of you and me, etc.) so it is no surprise that they control their nominee. It is progressive, not democratic.
“This proposal means that every Democrat, whether a member of Congress or a DNC member or a governor, would be physically blocked from voting for a presidential nominee.”
No it would. They would need to be elected to their delegation of their home state the way the Republicans do it.
“said Harold Ickes, a longtime DNC member who sits on the Rules and Bylaws Committee.”
“To pass, the changes need two-thirds support among all 447 DNC members.”
Here in lies the crux of their delemia. Those voting will be voting to eliminate their vote by right of their seat of power. Some of them have been doing this without having to justify their role in the party for a lifetime.
Ha!
Why do you think Trump benefited?
I think it is possible that Sanders could have peeled away, enough people who Trump won over, to win.
Just possible.
Now Trump is showing I was right about him, about trade, I do not believe dems will get those voters back.
But I am not sure that Sanders might not have been a stronger candidate.
The claim is straight up droit du seigneur
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.