Superdelegates: WTF?

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

After winning five-straight state primaries in relative blowout fashion, Bernie Sanders has cut significantly into Hillary Clinton’s pledged delegate lead.

According to the most recent totals, Clinton currently has 1,267 pledged delegates to Bernie’s 1,037. The actual race is close and they still have 18 contests remaining — including the delegate rich states of California, New York and Pennsylvania.

What’s disturbing, though, is that in spite of the actual closeness of the contest between them, members of the political establishment, called superdelegates, are going against the will of the voters in their own states to support Clinton over Sanders.

For instance, on Saturday, Sanders won every county in Washington state and won nearly 75% of the vote. It was a drubbing. Will of the people be damned, the superdelegates in Washington all said they are voting for Clinton, including Gov. Jay Inslee, U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray and U.S. Reps. Jim McDermott, Suzan DelBene, Rick Larsen, Adam Smith, Denny Heck and Derek Kilmer.

This is preposterous. Sanders handily won the state and won every congressional district by a landslide, but the governor, the senators and the congresspeople don’t care. They are firmly against the will of the people in their state.

Not a single superdelegate vote from Washington is going to Sanders.

Not one.

In fact, this is happening all over the country.

In spite of Sanders winning 15 states — including some by an 80-20 margin — over 94% of the 498 superdelegates have said they are backing Clinton anyway. Clinton currently has 469 superdelegate votes to just 29 for Sanders.

In Minnesota, Sanders won 61.6% of the vote, but 13 of the 16 superdelegates there, or 81%, including the governor, the senators, and many DNC members, say they are going for Hillary anyway. They aren’t even slightly persuaded by the will of the people.

In other states, like Colorado, where Sanders won with 59% of the vote, not a single superdelegate is voting for him. The same is true for Nebraska, where he won 57% of the vote but isn’t getting a single superdelegate.

It’s even worse in Idaho. Last week, Sanders won Idaho by a landslide with 78% of the vote. Every single superdelegate is going for Clinton anyway.

These states are anomalies. In every state Sanders won, except for his home state of Vermont, Clinton received almost every superdelegate vote there anyway.

Even there, where Sanders won over 86% of the vote, several of the superdelegates still opted to thwart the will of their state and pledge for Clinton.

Clinton supporters are quick to say, “these are the rules the candidates agreed upon,” and maybe that’s true, but voters are being ripped off. We didn’t decide on these rules and these officials are clearly going against the will of the people in their own states to support the establishment candidate who arranged for their support long before this election began.

Right now, if Sanders had the superdelegate votes that Clinton currently has, he’d be winning this race handily with 1,444 total delegates to Clinton’s 1,272.

Don’t say superdelegates aren’t determining this race. They are, and the practice should be abolished — immediately.

Image
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Well, since March 22nd Sanders has gained something like 53 delegates on Clinton. He still trails by 298 delegates. If superdelegates are party officials and other high-profile Democrats who get to vote on nominees at the convention, my bet is the Clintons can guarantee political favors and thus secure the nomination. Sanders can assert that superdelegates should vote along state lines, but political ideology and political pragmatism are two separate things. Cronyism is a political reality, and Sanders is essential anti-that. If you were a superdelegate angling for a sweet promotion or assignation and your vote was more or less decisive who would you support? Human nature, my friends, wins the day.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_huckelberry
_Emeritus
Posts: 4559
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:29 am

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _huckelberry »

Kevin Graham wrote:
Don’t say superdelegates aren’t determining this race. They are, and the practice should be abolished — immediately.


Kevin, you have not explained why it should be abolished. A political party is a group seeking to further political goals and elect candidates that can work together to further those goals. They can choose whomever they wish to be a candidate, whomever may be best to accomplish the goals. . A person not chosen is free to run on their own or make their own bull moose party.

Granted it makes sense to listen to primary voters.Those peoples votes will be needed in the actual election for the party to have success.

On the other hand I went to the Washington state caucus. I was astonished by the extent of Berney support. I also heard everybody who touched the issue state that they would be happy to vote Hillery if she turned out to be the candidate. People wanted to express a preference for Berney however.

doesn't sound settled at this point.
_Res Ipsa
_Emeritus
Posts: 10274
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:37 pm

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _Res Ipsa »

Kevin, take a deep breath. If Bernie gets the most elected delegates, the supers will support him. Check back in when he catches up to her total.
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
_Gunnar
_Emeritus
Posts: 6315
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 6:17 am

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _Gunnar »

Res Ipsa wrote:Kevin, take a deep breath. If Bernie gets the most elected delegates, the supers will support him. Check back in when he catches up to her total.

I hope you're right. I would rather vote for Sanders than Clinton. One of the big reasons I distrust Hillary is that when she became a senator and was beholden to wealthy contributors to her election campaigns from the financial industry, she voted for the very same bankruptcy bill that her Husband vetoed at her urging when he was President because it was so unfair to the least wealthy and most vulnerable American citizens.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.

“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
_MsJack
_Emeritus
Posts: 4375
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:06 am

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _MsJack »

Res Ipsa wrote:Kevin, take a deep breath. If Bernie gets the most elected delegates, the supers will support him. Check back in when he catches up to her total.

I wouldn't count on it. The Clintons don't play fair and the establishment is in the tank for Hillary. (I don't think Bernie will win the delegate count though.)

Granted, at this point, I'd be a-okay with the (few) Republican superdelegates ignoring the will of the people in their states and diverting the election away from Trump, so I'm probably something of a hypocrite on the matter.
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _EAllusion »

Sanders has explicitly said he's trying to use the superdelegates to win the election even if Clinton wins the majority of the pledged delegates and popular vote.

Obviously he's taking that strategy to fail-town, but whatever nobility there is in not doing that, he lacks it.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Of curse he wants super delegates to flip. He said last night in his interview with Rachel Maddow that his argument will be firmly grounded in the democratc principle of following the will of the people. It really makes no sense how Clinton gets all the super delegates from states Sanders won with ease. That undermines the democratic process.

If they were evenly tied with super delegates I could see why some might have a problem with Sanders trying to flip more, but it seems to me he is simply trying to get some to vote with their State.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _EAllusion »

Kevin Graham wrote:Of curse he wants super delegates to flip. He said last night in his interview with Rachel Maddow that his argument will be firmly grounded in the democratc principle of following the will of the people. It really makes no sense how Clinton gets all the super delegates from states Sanders won with ease. That undermines the democratic process.

If they were evenly tied with super delegates I could see why some might have a problem with Sanders trying to flip more, but it seems to me he is simply trying to get some to vote with their State.

I don't think you processed what I pointed out. Sanders wants super delegates to tip him the election even if Clinton wins the majority of votes and pledged delegates. He's explicitly endorsed for himself the slimey tactic everyone thinks Clinton will use if she must.

If he was walking that back on Maddow yesterday, ok. That's even more Clintonian of him. Maybe he has a private notion of "the will of the people" that isn't the same as the outcome of elections.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Superdelegates: WTF?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Can you point me to where he ever said this?
Post Reply