Super delegates may sink the Democrats

LA Times ^ | 19 January 2008 | Joshua Spivak

[shrinkermd]

In 1982, party leaders allocated for themselves a heaping portion of the delegates, creating positions called super delegates. Every Democratic member of Congress, every Democratic governor and all of the elected members of the Democratic National Committee (the majority of the super delegates) were each granted a vote at the convention. Party leaders assumed this would help them retain a measure of control over the process -- and of course continue to be granted the bounty of political favors that historically flowed from backing the right horse at the convention. In 2008, the 796 super delegates will make up about 20% of the entire convention. Winning the nomination requires 2,025 delegates.

In creating the super delegates, Democratic Party leaders sought to show that although they respected the popular will as expressed in the primaries and caucuses, they also expected that the super delegates could play a significant if not necessarily decisive role in the selection process. However, it did not work out that way. Popular will has put one candidate far enough ahead by the convention that the super delegates haven't come into play. Every nominee since these reforms has been decided based on the primary and caucus votes.

This year might be different. Because no front-runner has emerged, and the compressed time frame of the election may prevent any candidate from gaining enough momentum, no candidate may have enough delegates by convention time. In that case, the super delegates, the majority of whom currently support Hillary Rodham Clinton -- but who could switch sides at any time -- could well be the decision-makers at the convention. And this could be a real problem for the Democratic Party.

[Acrobat]

It’s kinda like it means this: “that’s so sad... hehehe...” (Sad-Happy)

And to be honest, English is the absolute collection center of words from every language on the planet from Barbecue to Yosemite... English takes what works and makes it its own...

[Repeal 16-17]

[T]he dems in power can screw the voters if they chose someone they don't like?

If these super delegates (is this a DNC comic book?) reverse the result arrived at by the party's primaries and caucuses, the party will splinter. The Obama would consider it to be a declaration of civil war. Also, it would give the image (correctly so) that the Democratic Party doesn't believe in democracy. On the other hand, it would be some good watching. ;)

[Verginius Rufus]

It should be spelled Schadenfreude (with an N before the F). Langenscheidt's renders it "malicious joy."

English is going to be in dire straits if it ever has to return all its borrowed words!

[upchuck]

And this could be a real problem for the Democratic Party.

Thank you Lord!

[Cruising Speed]

Every Democratic member of Congress, every Democratic governor and all of the elected members of the Democratic National Committee...the 796 super delegates

So...the DNC consists of over 400 elected members? I had no idea it was that large. Seems cumbersome, perhaps they have a central steering committee that makes the real decisions.

[Tarpon]

The party of the KKK will be hoisted on it’s own petard, race.

[redpoll]

>>>In creating the super delegates, Democratic Party leaders sought to show that although they respected the popular will as expressed in the primaries and caucuses, they also expected that the super delegates could play a significant if not necessarily decisive role in the selection process. <<<

In other words, in the tradition of the Left, the Democrats established a Politburo to ensure that everyone was working in the same direction with the same goals. It’s interesting how the interests of power are always supreme among the Democrats.

[mbraynard]

You can be pretty sure that the SDs are going to go with the majority of the primary delegates any time there is a two person race, as is the case now. Even if they could give the nomination to Hillary, they would not.