Comments on: All Hail The Super Delegates!!! http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:34:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: SilverSeraphim http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/#comment-390562 SilverSeraphim Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:11:13 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/#comment-390562 It's an insult to my intelligence and my right to vote if party insiders disregard my choice "for my own good". We are seeing the largest turnout of Democratic voters in years precisly because they want Obama. If the party takes note of that and nominates Obama they could sustain enough momentum to put him in the White House. But how many people would come out to vote if they feel their opinion is just going to be disregarded? It’s an insult to my intelligence and my right to vote if party insiders disregard my choice “for my own good”. We are seeing the largest turnout of Democratic voters in years precisly because they want Obama. If the party takes note of that and nominates Obama they could sustain enough momentum to put him in the White House. But how many people would come out to vote if they feel their opinion is just going to be disregarded?

]]> By: abrisaham http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/#comment-390541 abrisaham Wed, 06 Feb 2008 13:34:33 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/#comment-390541 the other was to avoid the Jimmy Carter phenomenon This is why Barak Obama should have to be worried. The trend was for the solid democratic base to go for Hillary. The gop, not so traditional democratic states went for Obama. So in the end if we head to the convention with the super delegates wanting to insure a victory they have to look at these types of results. Anger tradtional democrats or reward the newer democrat who has shown up for Obama. Tough decisions indeed and Im sure they will get it wrong. the other was to avoid the Jimmy Carter phenomenon

This is why Barak Obama should have to be worried.

The trend was for the solid democratic base to go for Hillary. The gop, not so traditional democratic states went for Obama.

So in the end if we head to the convention with the super delegates wanting to insure a victory they have to look at these types of results.

Anger tradtional democrats or reward the newer democrat who has shown up for Obama. Tough decisions indeed and Im sure they will get it wrong.

]]> By: mw http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/#comment-390470 mw Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:08:15 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2008/02/05/all-hail-the-super-delegates/#comment-390470 <blockquote><i>"Bowers suggests some solutions, but ultimately lands on the idea that the superdelegates should get behind whoever has more pledged delegates. This makes the most sense to me."</i> - JG </blockquote> I think this is naive. If the Democratic party power brokers wanted it to go this way, there would be no Super Delegates. Super Delegates were created, specifically to subvert the outcome of the primaries and caucuses, <i><b>if</b></i> the party insiders felt that the "great unwashed" were making a bad decision. From <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18277678/#storyContinued" rel="nofollow">MSNBC</a>: <blockquote><i>"Before 1972, party elders, such as Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and Charlie Buckley, the boss of The Bronx who helped John Kennedy clinch the 1960 nomination, wielded inordinate power. But in early 1970’s, the party’s rules were reformed to open the process to grass-roots activists, women, and ethnic minorities. Sen. George McGovern, the leading anti-Vietnam war liberal, won the 1972 nomination. McGovern turned out to be a disaster as a presidential candidate, winning only one state and the District of Columbia. So without reverting to the days of party bosses like Buckley, the Democrats decided to guarantee that elected officials would have a bigger voice in the nomination... There were, Mayer says, two motives in giving elected officials a big voice in the nomination. “One was not to get (ideologically) extreme candidates; the other was to avoid the Jimmy Carter phenomenon — where you had a guy who was not very experienced and not very well regarded by most of his fellow governors, but nevertheless managed to win the party’s nomination,” Mayer said. "</i> </blockquote> Now does that sound like either of the leading Dem candidates? Super Delegates probably owe a lot to Bill Clinton. If it si close, and they can use an excuse like the unseated Michigan and Florida delegates to justify a Clinton plurality - I think the push it to Clinton, and perhaps force the choice of Barack VP.

“Bowers suggests some solutions, but ultimately lands on the idea that the superdelegates should get behind whoever has more pledged delegates. This makes the most sense to me.” - JG

I think this is naive. If the Democratic party power brokers wanted it to go this way, there would be no Super Delegates. Super Delegates were created, specifically to subvert the outcome of the primaries and caucuses, if the party insiders felt that the “great unwashed” were making a bad decision.
From MSNBC:

“Before 1972, party elders, such as Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and Charlie Buckley, the boss of The Bronx who helped John Kennedy clinch the 1960 nomination, wielded inordinate power. But in early 1970’s, the party’s rules were reformed to open the process to grass-roots activists, women, and ethnic minorities. Sen. George McGovern, the leading anti-Vietnam war liberal, won the 1972 nomination. McGovern turned out to be a disaster as a presidential candidate, winning only one state and the District of Columbia. So without reverting to the days of party bosses like Buckley, the Democrats decided to guarantee that elected officials would have a bigger voice in the nomination… There were, Mayer says, two motives in giving elected officials a big voice in the nomination. “One was not to get (ideologically) extreme candidates; the other was to avoid the Jimmy Carter phenomenon — where you had a guy who was not very experienced and not very well regarded by most of his fellow governors, but nevertheless managed to win the party’s nomination,” Mayer said. “

Now does that sound like either of the leading Dem candidates?

Super Delegates probably owe a lot to Bill Clinton. If it si close, and they can use an excuse like the unseated Michigan and Florida delegates to justify a Clinton plurality - I think the push it to Clinton, and perhaps force the choice of Barack VP.

]]>