On edit, I offer a tip of the hat to MineralMan for showing welcome diplomacy in the face of my sarcasm and snark



The only way we bring our favorite candidate to the general election is if all these people supporting him (or her) become Democrats and/or participate in the caucuses.

That's how it works. If you don't participate, you don't count. It's that simple. Same thing in general elections. Vote or go unheard. I'm not sure why that's such a hard lesson for people to learn. If you support a candidate who is polling in the minority, then Job One is to get out the vote for your candidate, either at caucuses or primary elections. That's the only thing you can do.

In all my years of being involved in elections, though, I've actually never seen it happen that a minority candidate managed to get enough voters out in the primaries to change things, with one exception:

In my State Senate District in St. Paul, the Hmong community turned out in amazing percentages and a Hmong candidate just barely won the primary and became our State Senator. He had other supporters, as well, including me. The man had no budget for campaigning, so the community turned out. He didn't even have yard signs. I actually went online and had a yard sign printed in his support and put it in front of my house.

At one point, the candidate stopped by and asked where I had gotten the yard sign. Apparently he had been told about it. I explained and gave him the URL for the place I had purchased it. More soon appeared on neighborhood lawns, all purchased by the people who lived there. Foung Hawj (pronounced Fong Her) is his name, and he's doing a great job in office and will be re-elected.

That, however, is the only example I've encountered, but it is informative, or should be.

...not showing up in polling, but waiting to show up en masse on Primary/Caucus day and shock the Democratic Party establishment.

Of course, THEN I was told (by Bernie Sanders) that if voting happened today, he'd lose.

It's really hard to follow along.

Polling companies sometimes try to poll what they call "likely voters," but that's not foolproof. Getting primary and caucus voters to actually turn out is the dilemma each candidate faces. It's purely a GOTV thing.

A dedicated campaign organization has the potential to throw the whole thing into a turmoil, IF they can turn out more voters than expected. In states with closed primaries, that also means getting voters registered to a party in time to participate in the primary or caucus.

Our primary caucus meeting for my precinct in 2008 had almost exactly 100 people casting their votes. We're part of a Congressional District. All of the votes in the precincts in that district are pooled, and the result determine the delegate selected at the state convention for that district to the National Convention. It all starts, in Minnesota, with those precinct caucuses. They determine how delegates will be divided. Similar processes operate in primary states.

Constitute something of an anti-democratic force in the nominating process, although reasonable minds may disagree on that score.

delegate count. That's it. They exist to break virtual ties, so conventions don't go on to multiple ballots. They came into being after the 1968 Democratic Convention. Most super delegates are elected officials, congress members, Senators and Governors. The rest are a state's representatives to the DNC. They're also elected by the party - at the state convention. They're not pledged to anyone, and can vote as they please. Some declare themselves by endorsing one or another candidate, but others do not.

They are only 15% of the delegates, though. The only time they actually come into play is if things are very close at the convention. Beyond that, their votes are overwhelmed by the 4000+ other delegates, who are pledged to vote for the candidates according to the primary or caucus results.

Will this primary season produce a very close split between Clinton and Sanders? I tend to doubt it, actually. If that's true, the Super delegates won't make any difference at all. The voters will decide.

Just like having a scrawny handful of 6 debates scheduled when no one is watching does.

That said, I do hope by all means that Bernie's 'ground game' includes getting Independents, Greens,
and (gasp!) yes even Republicans who support Sanders RE-REGISTERED AS DEMOCRATS, so they
can actually vote for him in the Primary.

by a pretty large margin.

The reason I posted this in the first place was so people knew just how important those caucuses and primaries really are. You're exactly right: If Bernie is to win, then he's going to have to win in those primaries and caucuses. That's the work that needs to be done by his supporters. It's a GOTV thing, really, and a voter registration thing, like it always is.

I hope Bernie's organization understand that and is putting enough energy into it. See, I'll vote for the nominee, regardless, so if Bernie's supporters can get him the nomination, he'll get my vote.

It's not up to me. I'm voting for Clinton at my caucus meeting. I have one vote. If you don't like how I'll vote, then get two people to that primary caucus on March 1 and beat me. It's up to you and other Sanders supporters to do that. This OP explains why. That's all it does. It describes the process. That process will not change for 2016. Use it or you lose.

super delegates are not chosen through the primary process and need not be elected to anything. Your attempt to portray them as "elected" is simply dishonest. You are making a dishonest argument using the technique of equivocation in an attempt to fool people. Why would you do that?

Congress members, Senators, Governors and members from that state's delegation to the DNC. That last group is elected at the state convention. Every last one of the super delegates is a person who has been elected. The difference is that they're independent in their choice at the National convention. They can vote as they please.

I'm ambivalent about super delegates, but I have nothing to do with their existence. They are part of the process. The process is what it is.

Bottom line is that for a candidate who is in the minority in the polls, the winning solution is to flood the caucuses and primaries with supporters. Nothing else will work. That's the lesson here. Can Sanders do that? If so, then he can be the nominee. If he cannot, he will not. It's not up to me. None of it's up to me. I get one vote at my precinct caucus. You get one vote. Everyone gets one vote.

Want Sanders to be the nominee? Start registering and lining up voters in your state. That's what it will take.

Your original argument was that the candidate was selected through the primary process, that it is a democratic process in which the people select the candidate.

The inconvenience of the super delegates has forced you to engage in a form of lying by attempting to use the fact that some of the super delegates are elected officials (while overtly lying about the fact that some aren't) to pretend that they too are part of the open democratic primary and caucus process. In fact, as you should certainly know, the purpose of super delegates is to buffer the candidate selection process from "the masses" in order to lower the risk of a non establishment winning.

You aren't stupid, so again why are you engaged in making dishonest arguments?

no argument there.

That't why Bernie feels strongly there needs to be a genuine progressive candidate, for
the health of the Party and the nation.

drive nationwide, I guess. Nothing else will make him the nominee. That's the reality.

Have I got that right?

Sid

Hilarious.

Last edited Wed Nov 25, 2015, 04:10 PM - Edit history (1)

That's how it works. The primaries and caucuses will decide who the nominee is. People's votes. Better get started on the GOTV efforts, I guess, for the primary or caucuses in your state. Whoever wins in those and has a majority of delegates will be the nominee.

I didn't create the system. It is what it is. Work with it or lose. GOTV! That's the only answer.

i knew most of this, but it's good to have a reminder how it all works.

Cheers, K&R.

I've been posting similar things from time to time. It's important to understand how the system operates, since it is the system that will determine the nominee. The lesson is simple: If you want to win, you have to get more votes than the other candidate. That's the challenge.

They represent 1/6 of the total delegate count and are not chosen through the primary or caucus process. They are there to tip the scales in favor of party establishment candidates and can be a factor in a close contest.

They're primarily Congress members and Senators, along with Democratic Governors and a state's representatives at the DNC. Most states also include one elder statesman who is a Democrat.

All are elected, either by the people or by the state's Democratic Convention. They're not completely unrepresentative of voters, but are not pledged according a particular primary or caucus system for that year.

They really only matter in close races, where the difference in percentages of delegates is less than the 15-16% they represent.

They're rarely the deciding factor, really. I predict they will not be the deciding factor in 2016.

they are unpledged and can vote as they please and for whom they please. The regular delegates are pledged to candidates according to the ratios determined by the voters. At some point (and I don't know what point), if balloting continues at the convention without achieving a majority, they can change, but that rarely happens.

A candidate failing to reach the 15% threshold statewide might nevertheless emerge with some delegates if s/he gets to 15% in at least one Congressional district. Conversely, a candidate who does get to 15% statewide might receive a markedly smaller share of the delegates, if most are allocated by CD and that candidate had many "wasted" votes in CD's where s/he fell below 15%.

I'm not clear on how the proportionality rule with the 15% threshold is applied in a district with only a few delegates. For example, suppose that, in a district entitled to choose three district delegates, the three candidates poll 50%-30%-20%. If every candidate clearing the threshold is entitled to at least one delegate, then it seems each of the three would have to get one delegate, despite the big disparity in their totals.

the scope of a DU OP, I think.