So what should be the unofficial rule on how Super Delegates vote?

Just want to see hoe divergent the views are on this issue.


Keep in mind howwever that in the absence or the super delegates a candidate would need 4,049 -796 or 3,253/2 +1 for a majority. That means 1,627 delegates

Clinton has 1,160 pledged (roughly) and that would mean she would 467 of the remaining 555

Obama has 1,297 pledged (roughly) and that would mean he would need 330 of the remaining 555

Choose your weapon or choose your poison.

Changing the rules mid-contest is bad form. Extremely bad form. This started with the superdelegates able to cast for whomever they wanted to, and it should end that way, without some unofficial rules.

but the question goes to how DUers believe they ought to vote given that they are free agents.

but should they be what they are next time around?

The only reason the superdelegates exist is so the Democratic establishment can put down insurrections in the ranks. It's all about control. It is no coincidence that the superdelegates rules were created in the same era as the DLC.

thye have been in place since 1970

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022602649.html

Article written by former governor Jim Hunt. The conservatives thought the party had been hijacked by activists in 72, and after Jimmy Carter was trounced by Reagan they decided the only way to keep that from happening was put more power in the hands of 'experienced' party leaders. Superdelegates were created in 82. DLC in 84 or 85 (a little disagreement about that, though they were formalized in 85).

Both have the same intention - put down populist revolts among democrats.

From Wikipedia.


After the 1968 Democratic National Convention, the Democratic Party implemented changes in its delegate selection process, based on the work of the McGovern-Fraser Commission. The purpose of the changes was to make the composition of the convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast during the campaign for the nomination.

These comprehensive changes left some Democrats believing that the role of party leaders and elected officials had been unduly diminished, weakening the Democratic tickets of George McGovern and Jimmy Carter. In 1982, a commission chaired by former North Carolina Governor James Hunt created superdelegates. Under the original Hunt plan, superdelegates consisted of 30% of the total delegate count, but when it was finally implemented in 1984, superdelegates consisted of 14% of the total count. The number has steadily increased until today, where superdelegates are approximately 20% of the total delegate count. <3>

In the 1984 election, the major contenders for the Presidential nomination were Gary Hart and Walter Mondale. Each of them won some primaries and caucuses. Hart was only slightly behind Mondale in the total number of votes cast, but Mondale won the support of almost all the superdelegates and became the nominee.<4>

In 1988, a study found that superdelegates and delegates selected through the primary and caucus process are not substantively different in terms of viewpoints on issues from each other. However, it also found that superdelegates are more likely to prefer candidates with Washington experience than outsider candidates.<5>

The superdelegates have not always prevailed, however. In the Democratic primary phase of the 2004 election, Howard Dean acquired an early lead in delegate counts by obtaining the support of a number of superdelegates before even the first primaries were held. Nevertheless, John Kerry defeated Dean in a succession of primaries and caucuses and won the nomination.


But here is the wiki history on the DLC
The DLC was founded by Al From in 1985 in the wake of incumbent President Ronald Reagan's defeat of Walter Mondale in the 1984 presidential election. Other founders include Democratic Governors Chuck Robb (Virginia), Bruce Babbitt (Arizona), and Lawton Chiles (Florida), as well as Senator Sam Nunn (Georgia) and Representative Dick Gephardt (Missouri).<1>

The organization started as a group of forty-three elected officials, and two staffers, Al From and Will Marshall. Their original focus was to secure the 1988 presidential nomination of a southern conservative Democrat such as Nunn or Robb. After the success of Jesse Jackson, a vocal critic of the DLC, in winning a number of southern states in 1988's "Super Tuesday" primary, the group began to shift its focus towards influencing public debate. In 1989, Marshall founded the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank which has since turned out policy blueprints for the DLC. Its most extensive series of papers is the series of New Economy Policy Reports.


-----

they were cetrainly contemporaneous but I do not see them as directly linked.

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4906504#4906504
4906504, Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates
Posted by rodeodance on Wed Mar-05-08 12:05 PM

Its the process that counts folks:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-schlesinger/obama-and-the-myth-of-ple_b_89977.html


Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates

Posted March 5, 2008 | 10:15 AM (EST)


There is no rule in the politics of Democratic Party conventions that says that the contender with the largest number of pledged delegates short of the total required for nomination should automatically, by dint of that achievement, be handed the party's designation. This argument is now being put forth by Senator Obama's campaign.


Such a contention is belied by the modern-day history of Democratic conventions. In 1912, the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, Champ Clark, went to the Baltimore convention with the largest number of delegates, around 440, Woodrow Wilson was second with 324, trailed by a few others -- with two thirds of the convention vote required for nomination. Champ Clark was not then allowed to proclaim himself victorious simply because he led the pack. Rather the proceedings went through almost 50 ballots over a week's period that, after much maneuvering, resulted in Wilson accumulating enough delegates to secure the nomination.

In 1932, Franklin Roosevelt arrived at the Democratic Convention this time with the most delegates -- having won them through some primaries and some Democratic state organizations -- but still short of the requisite two-thirds majority. Despite this lead, the party did not hand him the nomination. He had to proceed through four ballots to achieve it.

….Read this omitted paragraph for another good example………

Now today some in the Obama campaign and in the media are dismissing the importance of Hillary Clinton's victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island as unimportant. For they argue that, by any careful analysis of the delegate selection process under the present Democratic Party proportional representation system, whatever delegate totals Senator Clinton wins through the end of this year's primary season, will not be able to overcome Senator Obama's current unsurpassable lead over Senator Clinton and therefore Obama will deserve the support of the so-called "super delegates" and should gain the nomination. But that is not how it works as we have seen in past Democratic conventions. A lead in pledged delegates is not enough. You still have to convince your party that you are the best nominee. That is what the next stage of this election is all about.