| Feb 14, 2008 @ 1:19 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
kattsmeow
Posts: 22,629
|
Ok, now this is something I am really hearing about this year. I suppose it is because the race for the Democrtic nomination is slow close.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate
Superdelegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention include all Democratic members of the United States Congress, Democratic governors, various additional elected officials, members of the Democratic National Committee, as well as "all former Democratic Presidents, all former Democratic Vice Presidents, all former Democratic Leaders of the U.S. Senate, all former Democratic Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives and Democratic Minority Leaders, as applicable, and all former Chairs of the Democratic National Committee."
There is an exception, however, for otherwise qualified individuals who endorse another party’s candidate for President; they lose their superdelegate status. In 2008, Senator Joe Lieberman was disqualified as a superdelegate because he endorsed Republican John McCain.
|
|
  |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 1:50 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
LipGlossQueen9
Posts: 10,955
|
What about them?
Are you asking what they are, or do you want us to give our opinions on the superdelegate system?
Cos I can do both but I don't feel like it so let me know 
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 1:55 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
kattsmeow
Posts: 22,629
|
Oh, geez ok.
I personally take offense of this system. It is like them telling us we don't know who to vote for. Will thes Super Delegates vote the way we want them to? I think not.
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 2:02 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
LipGlossQueen9
Posts: 10,955
|
Yeah that's the thing, a lot of people feel it's un-democratic. But what else are they supposed to do when neither candidate has enough pledged delegates to receive the nomination?
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 2:17 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
MotownManiax
Posts: 9,737
|
 The Super Delegate system sure sounds like an odd way to nominate, katts. I kinda reminds me of a presidential election that's thrown to Congress for final determination? Hopefully Hillary or Obama will hit that magic delegate number first and avoid the whole mess?
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 2:57 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
Paralegal_at_Law
Posts: 5,872
|
Does the "Superdelegate" system violate the "one man, one vote" rule? It smacks to me of the same kind of system where in many states, counties were guaranteed a seat in the state legislature regardless of thier population.
The courts struck those laws down as being unconstitutional.
The "superdelegates" are NOT elected delegates and as such seem to also violate the equal protection clause.
JMO
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 4:14 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
Nightowl001
Posts: 7,509
|
I would have to check on it, but I'm pretty sure the policies of the Democratic National Committee do not have to adhere to any fairness doctrine.
Anyone who doesn't like abiding by the rules for the nomination of the party's representative candidate for the presidency is quite free to declare themselves independent, Libertarian, Republican or socialist and not participate. Anyone who doesn't receive the party nomination is entirely free to declare themselves an Independent candidate for President. All they have to do is come up with the fees and groundwork to get on the ballot in all 50 states. But the Democratic Party can choose any way they wish, including drawing straws or saying eenie-meenie-minie-mo, to pick who will represent the party. The Democratic Party is an organization, with vested interests and goals, but it is NOT part of the government, no matter how they see themselves.
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 4:21 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
Bj864
Posts: 3,964
|
It is my understanding that the super delegates will only decide the candidate if neither candidate has the required amount of delegates to win (2,025).
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 4:43 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
kattsmeow
Posts: 22,629
|
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.
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.
No Bj, they always have a vote no matter if it is close or not.
Remember this part though,,,
Superdelegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention include all Democratic members of the United States Congress, Democratic governors, various additional elected officials, members of the Democratic National Committee, as well as "all former Democratic Presidents, all former Democratic Vice Presidents, all former Democratic Leaders of the U.S. Senate, all former Democratic Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives and Democratic Minority Leaders, as applicable, and all former Chairs of the Democratic National Committee."
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 5:16 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 13,662
|
But the Democratic Party can choose any way they wish, including drawing straws or saying eenie-meenie-minie-mo, to pick who will represent the party. The Democratic Party is an organization, with vested interests and goals, but it is NOT part of the government, no matter how they see themselves.
my thoughts are that the two party system needs to be made to distance themselves from the actual election for POTUS as most everyone does equate the party (one or the other..) as being part of the government.. and all the monies being spent as part of the requirement to elect a president..as standard operating procedure)
It has been stated over and over that only a candidate from one or the other has any chance of being elected.. but I am hoping that by 2012 this will change as the Internet grows into a more reliable source of information..( one of the reasons I support Wiki as much as I do even though it has some faults..)
but what is really strange (to me) is an open primary ..where a member of the opposition party can vote for the worst possible candidate in the primary.. then vote for his guy in the actual election.. this could be construed as voting twice legally 
|
| |
|
| Feb 14, 2008 @ 6:11 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
Say_Yes
Posts: 2,228
|
The super delegates are a way for the party to repay those who are powers within the party and to give them more of a say in the nomination process. In most years, the party nominee is decided long before the convention arives and the net effect of the super delegates becomes inconsequential.
Over the years, the number of super delegates has increased. The democratic convention has a total of 4,049 delegates (which includes Michigan - 156 & Florida - 210 which are not eligible to participate currently), of which 796 or 19.66% are super delegates. Odds are that neither Hillary nor Obama is going be able to get the 2,025 necessary to win the nomination out of the 3,253 that can be elected. This is exacerbated by the fact that currently 366 of those delegates are being excluded from the convention, since they are in florida & michigan. So, to win the nomination outright, without the super delegates, a candidate needs to win 2,025 of the 2,887 that are to be decided through the primaries and caucuses. That simply is not going to happen. As a result, the super delegates are going to be the ones to determine the outcome of the democratic nomination.
Then again, you can bet that there will be court challenges yet to come over Florida and Michigan. If you thought that the last general election got ugly, just wait for this to really get going.
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 16, 2008 @ 11:15 AM |
Super delegates?? |
|
kattsmeow
Posts: 22,629
|
Key Dems sit on fence to avoid fight
Don Van Natta Jr.,Jo Becker, New York Times
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Printable VersionEmail This Article del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Reddit Slashdot
Fark
Newsvine
Google Bookmarks
(3) Georgia (default)
Verdana
Times New Roman
Arial
Former Vice President Al Gore and a number of other senior Democrats plan to remain neutral for now in the presidential race in part to keep open the option to broker a peaceful resolution to what they fear could be a bitterly divided convention, party officials and aides said Friday.
Democratic Party officials said that in the past week Gore and other leading Democrats held private talks as worry mounted that the close race between Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton could be decided by a group of 796 party insiders known as superdelegates.
The signs that party elders are weighing whether and how to intervene reflects the extraordinary nature of the contest now and the concern among some Democrats that they not risk an internal battle that could harm the party in the general election.
But they also provided an early glimpse at the complex set of trade-offs facing party leaders, from their desire to make their own influence felt to their worries about offending the candidates and particular constituencies - not to mention the long and sometimes troubled relationship between Gore and the Clintons.
Among the issues party leaders are grappling with, they said, is how to avoid the perception of a backroom deal that could be seen as thwarting the will of millions of voters who have cast ballots in primaries and caucuses. That perception could cripple the eventual Democratic nominee's chances of winning the presidency in November, they said.
More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/16/MNKGV3VC7.DTL
|
| |
|
| Feb 16, 2008 @ 1:46 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
MotownManiax
Posts: 9,737
|
....in part to keep open the option to broker a peaceful resolution to what they fear could be a bitterly divided convention, party officials and aides said Friday.
.....how to avoid the perception of a backroom deal that could be seen as thwarting the will of millions of voters who have cast ballots in primaries and caucuses. That perception could cripple the eventual Democratic nominee's chances of winning the presidency in November,
Sheesh, katts, the Dems sure know how to muck up what should be a gimme after eight years of what they call the worst administration in our history???  
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 16, 2008 @ 2:08 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
kattsmeow
Posts: 22,629
|
 yes Mo, they sure do!
Oh and I am sorry I didn't clean up the article before it was too late. I should know not to post before 2 cups of coffee at least!
|
| |
|
| Feb 16, 2008 @ 2:23 PM |
Super delegates??
|
|
MusicMonster
Posts: 2,954
|
I just don't much like the entire SuperDelegate system.
There's GOT to be a better way than that, it seems to me.. It isn't even logical.
I'm inclined to wonder who dreamed it up, and what they were smoking at the time.
I'm for the dramatic simplification of an incredibly overly-complex electoral process. And folks, that ain't it!!! At least not if you ask me. 
-MM 
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 16, 2008 @ 5:06 PM |
Super delegates?? |
|
iam7545
Posts: 4,151
|
The super delegates are mostly OLD WHITE MEN - and have already received about ONE MILLION dollars in cash from Obama and Billary = SO it is a buy yourself a scum bag system of politics for the DEMS!
Yes - the Dems want to count every vote allright!
WHAT A FARCE -
>>>>>>>>>>> HOW TO BUY THE ELECTION! <<<<<<<<<<<<<
|
| |
|
|
|
|