Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Super-Delegate, Super-Disaster

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Raydawg1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 02:18 AM
Original message
Super-Delegate, Super-Disaster
Republicans must be jumping up and down. The Super-delegate system might be the greatest thing that could ever happen for them in the upcomming election.

If the super dels. determine the nominee, they will inevitably use this as their main argument against us in the GE.

"Dont vote for the democrat, after all, a majority of thier own party didn't either." I can see it now.

Not to mention that it would tear our party apart and drive voter turnout way down.


Time to get rid of this outdated system.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Super delegates were supposed to be a stopper for disaster, not a way to subvert the process
Edited on Tue Feb-12-08 02:21 AM by TexasObserver
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raydawg1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. They are too outdated, the world is a different place now.
not to mention un-democratic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think their role has merit, because otherwise you'll have state and federal office holders ...
... vying with citizens for places at the convention. I don't know if that's a great idea.

I favor making the superdelegates ex officio and non voting, except in certain really limited circumstances, and then more like a tie breaker than anything.

We can't call ourselves the Democratic party and use some Politiburo system to ensure party regimen. That's more Stalinist than Progressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. Those who complain about the superdelegates will not define "majority of their party." Will you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raydawg1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. meaning the winner of the popular vote and their supporters.
Edited on Tue Feb-12-08 03:15 AM by Raydawg1234
AKA whoever wins the primaries/caucuses.

Why is that so hard to understand? Some people need to take democracy 101.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. I recommend Civics 101 for you. Obama said that the superdelegates should vote for the winner
in their states. Do you agree?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoldieAZ49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:27 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. no he did not
he said the super delegates should vote for who has the most delegates voted in the primary process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:33 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Link:
Obama this week warned Super-delegates to vote the way their states have voted, "if this contest comes down to super-delegates, we are going to be able to say we have more pledged delegates, which means the Democratic voters have spoken. Those super-delegates, those party insiders would have to think long and hard how they would approach the nomination." Obama suggested "the argument we would be making to super-delegates is, if we come into the convention with more pledged delegates then I think we can make a very strong argument that our constituencies have spoken and I think that's going to be pretty important when it comes to the general election."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/the-super-deleg.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raydawg1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Uhhhhhh, in fact I do agree. But, some of them won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JCMach1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-12-08 03:42 AM
Response to Original message
10. Quit hand-wringing... if there is a CLEAR winner on either side
Supers will fall in behind the electorate.

Some are already making noise about this. If Hillary doesn't win upcoming contests, or if Obama doesn't run the table we will be deadlocked anyway.

Then (and I repeat Oh SHIT!) we are in brokered convention territory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 02:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC