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
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The (un)Democratic Party (New York Times editorial) (Original Post) Baobab Apr 2016 OP
Was just gonna post that. It's an excellent article. Autumn Apr 2016 #1
Linky no worky (atm) Bernin4U Apr 2016 #2
Here is a bit Voice for Peace Apr 2016 #3
 

Voice for Peace

(13,141 posts)
3. Here is a bit
Mon Apr 4, 2016, 03:52 PM
Apr 2016

I accessed through the Opinion link at the site:

Charles M. Blow
There are two prominent features of the Democratic Party’s presidential selection process that are thoroughly undemocratic and undermine faith in the party: superdelegates (which favor Hillary Clinton) and caucuses (which favor Bernie Sanders).

As the New York Times editorial board explained: “Superdelegates are party bigwigs — 712 Democratic leaders, legislators, governors and the like. They can vote for any candidate at the nominating convention, regardless of whether that candidate won the popular vote. These unpledged delegates make up 30 percent of the 2,382 delegates whose votes are needed to win the nomination, and could thus make all the difference.”

Let’s start there. Superdelegates, whose votes are not bound by the millions of individual voters, make up nearly a third of the delegates that would be required to win the nomination. That, on its face, is outrageous.

It’s no surprise that superdelegates were created by establishment elites to increase their own power. Superdelegates were invented by a Democratic rule change in the early 1980s after the nomination of George McGovern in 1972 and the devastating loss of Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan in 1980, precisely to help the establishment prevent the nomination of insurgent candidates of whom the establishment disapproved. (Sanders is nothing if not an insurgent candidate.)

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Bernie Sanders»The (un)Democratic Party ...