2016 Postmortem

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts) Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:36 AM Feb 2016

Why the Panic Over Dem Super Delegates Is Rooted in Lazy Reporting

As the Democrats head to Nevada, Bernie Sanders has 36 delegates, Hillary Clinton has 32, but you might not know that if you’ve been exposed to some lazy or sensational journalism suggesting that Clinton is in the lead.

Following the New Hampshire primary, a number of outlets reported that Clinton, rather than Sanders, was ahead in the delegate race because she had secured the backing of a number of Democratic super delegates – officeholders, party activists and officials who are not bound to vote for a candidate at the party’s convention in Philadelphia.

Sanders supporters are convinced that the super delegates backing Hillary Clinton made some sort of corrupt deal with the Devil. They see it as evidence that the game is rigged. But people only become super delegates because they have a longstanding affinity for, and loyalty toward the Democratic Party. Some may be total hacks, but they’re party hacks, and that makes them unlikely candidates to completely rip apart the Democratic coalition for a generation or two, which would be the only possible result of these unelected delegates overturning the will of primary voters. They share a common sense of duty to the best interests of the institution.

It is no doubt true that many of them feel a sense of loyalty to the Clintons. But it doesn’t follow that they’d effectively become political suicide bombers because of that loyalty. They want to beat the Republican nominee in November, and those who hold elected office also want to be re-elected. The worst way to accomplish either goal would be to create a massive scandal within the Democratic Party just months before the election. The super delegates aren’t going to destroy the party from within just because they prefer one candidate over the other.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/why-panic-over-dem-super-delegates-rooted-lazy-reporting

15 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why the Panic Over Dem Super Delegates Is Rooted in Lazy Reporting (Original Post) restorefreedom Feb 2016 OP

"Lazy" or tilted? SHRED Feb 2016 #1

the author was being too nice restorefreedom Feb 2016 #2

Yeah tilted, biased etc. not necessarily lazy Iggy Knorr Feb 2016 #7

very good point. spin takes effort. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #14

There seems to be a "don't worry about it" trend beginning regarding super delegates. Kilgore Feb 2016 #3

Especially when people like Hairy Reed start talking about brokered conventions. Fuddnik Feb 2016 #6

Something stinks...... Kilgore Feb 2016 #9

And those superdelegates are not likely to swoon over an Independent/Democrat-come-lately. randome Feb 2016 #4

They will if the voters do FBaggins Feb 2016 #8

Sure, but I think it would need to be an overwhelming tidal wave of support for Sanders. randome Feb 2016 #10

They'll really only make a difference in a brokered convention FBaggins Feb 2016 #12

No they won't He would have to get 63% of the regular delegates and that is impossible. leftofcool Feb 2016 #11

Sorry. That's nonsense. FBaggins Feb 2016 #13

'Super Delegate' is a slang term, in Party regulations they are called 'Unpledged Delegates' and Bluenorthwest Feb 2016 #15

Not 'lazy', it serves two purposes..... daleanime Feb 2016 #5

SHRED

(28,136 posts)

1. "Lazy" or tilted?

Reply to restorefreedom (Original post)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:37 AM

Feb 2016

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts)

2. the author was being too nice

Reply to SHRED (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:42 AM

Feb 2016

tilted
biased
intentionally misleading
slanted

all would be more accurate in describing the m$$$$m

Iggy Knorr

(247 posts)

7. Yeah tilted, biased etc. not necessarily lazy

Reply to SHRED (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:54 AM

Feb 2016

It may be less effort or more, depending on what your paymasters require you to do.

If you are just forwarding another blog post about a non-controversy and asking if its appropriate to discuss it, then maybe thats lazy. But making up a bunch of shit on the Washington Post about the same non-controversy took actual work.

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts)

14. very good point. spin takes effort. nt

Reply to Iggy Knorr (Reply #7)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:45 AM

Feb 2016

Kilgore

(1,733 posts)

3. There seems to be a "don't worry about it" trend beginning regarding super delegates.

Reply to restorefreedom (Original post)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:48 AM

Feb 2016

Saw two already this morning.

Me thinks something is really beginning to stink.

Fuddnik

(8,846 posts)

6. Especially when people like Hairy Reed start talking about brokered conventions.

Reply to Kilgore (Reply #3)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:52 AM

Feb 2016

Kilgore

(1,733 posts)

9. Something stinks......

Reply to Fuddnik (Reply #6)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:04 AM

Feb 2016

And it's not the Roquefort cheese.

randome

(34,845 posts)

4. And those superdelegates are not likely to swoon over an Independent/Democrat-come-lately.

Reply to restorefreedom (Original post)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:51 AM

Feb 2016

It's just the way it is.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

FBaggins

(26,748 posts)

8. They will if the voters do

Reply to randome (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:55 AM

Feb 2016

That's just the way it is

randome

(34,845 posts)

10. Sure, but I think it would need to be an overwhelming tidal wave of support for Sanders.

Reply to FBaggins (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:07 AM

Feb 2016

I don't see that now. With both candidates being fairly equal in terms of support, I think they would default to the 'real' Democrat versus the Independent.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

FBaggins

(26,748 posts)

12. They'll really only make a difference in a brokered convention

Reply to randome (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:11 AM

Feb 2016

They won't reverse the will of the electorate even if it's a thin margin.

leftofcool

(19,460 posts)

11. No they won't He would have to get 63% of the regular delegates and that is impossible.

Reply to FBaggins (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:10 AM

Feb 2016

FBaggins

(26,748 posts)

13. Sorry. That's nonsense.

Reply to leftofcool (Reply #11)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 10:17 AM

Feb 2016

They won't overturn the will of the voters

They're only with Hillary because they assume that she will win. Eight years ago or was the same way. When Obama pulled slightly ahead, they started to abandon her. She dropped out before they all fled.

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)

15. 'Super Delegate' is a slang term, in Party regulations they are called 'Unpledged Delegates' and

Reply to randome (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 11:07 AM

Feb 2016

'uncommitted delegates' because that is what they are. I call them what the Party regs call them because words mean things.
'Super' is a word meaning 'very good, excellent, extraordinary'
'Uncommitted' is a word meaning 'not promised, reserved for later use'.

Unpledged is technically not a word at all, proper form would be 'delegates who are not pledged' but we are Americans and we say 'unpledged' if we wish, has the same meaning as 'uncommitted' which has nothing to do with quality and everything to do with not having been promised.

daleanime

(17,796 posts)

5. Not 'lazy', it serves two purposes.....

Reply to restorefreedom (Original post)

Sat Feb 13, 2016, 09:51 AM

Feb 2016

1-Helps create a drama.

2-The number of corporates supporting Bernie can be counted on one hand with fingers left over. If corporate media can scare off even a few Bernie leaning voters they will.

Reply to this discussion