- ‹ previous
- 3775 of 8922
- next ›
Is it Time To Worry about Superdelegates in the Clinton-Obama Contest?
Omigod! Here come the superdelegates! The Washington Post's Paul Kane has done the math and reached the conclusion that the Democratic presidential race will be decided by superdelegates--those 800 or so party officials and officeholders who are automatically awarded delegate status and who can vote any which way they please at the convention. Kane explains:
There are 3,253 pledged delegates, those doled out based on actual voting in primaries and caucuses. And you need 2,025 to win the nomination.
To date, about 52 percent of those 3,253 delegates have been pledged in the voting process -- with Clinton and Obama roughly splitting them at 832 and 821 delegates a piece, according to the AP.
That means there are now only about 1,600 delegates left up for grabs in the remaining states and territories voting.
So, do the math. If they both have 820 plus pledged delegates so far, they'll need to win roughly 1,200 -- 75 percent -- of the remaining 1,600 delegates to win the nomination through actual voting.
In other words: Ain't gonna happen...And then the super delegates decide this thing.
Does this mean the contest will be settled in some smoke-free backroom by machine hacks who don't give a fig about the Democratic vox populi?
Not necessarily. Kane's arithmetic is spot-on. But with superdelegates comprising about 20 percent of the entire voting bloc, they essentially have to play a part in any close race. The question is how will they break. At the end of the primary season, one candidate will have more non-superdelegates than the other. If that contender also ends up with a majority of superdelegates, all will be well. The people's choice wins. It won't matter that he or she needed superdelegates to reach the magic number.
But if the second-place finisher picks up enough of a majority of the superdelegates to leap over the leader, then there will be quite a fuss. In that case, non-elected delegates will be deciding the race against the will of the majority (however slight it might be) of Democratic voters.
At this stage, there's no telling what all those superdelegates will do. Fewer than half have committed--and, as of a few days ago, the campaigns were saying that Clinton had about a 70-delegate edge among this band. But these superdelegates can change their minds up until the vote is called at the convention. As for the non-declared SDs, will they want to see the party elite anoint the second-place candidate and create a massive firestorm that will divide the party? And remember the Democratic establishment is not the same thing as the Clinton establishment. Not all of these influential Democrats are Clintonites. Not all believe that Clinton would be the best candidate for the party in November. She has the lead in superdelegates at the moment, but Obama can be competitive in this contest.
So place a hold on conspiracy theorizing or super-delegate hysteria for the time being. After all the primary votes are counted, the spotlight will shine brightly on these people. If they want to pull a backroom stunt, they will have to do so in public view.
Good piece.
Sadly I expect the party to display some of the best and some of the worst facets of the system in place.
Who knows how bad it will get. The roots and influence of the established party faithful run deep and many of them hold their opinion above the rank and file.
Same as it ever was.
You know what? I am not in favor of these Super Delegates. Let the people decide! This reminds me of when the Supreme Court named Bush as President.
Agreed. In this day and age let's go with a popular vote.. because, you know... whoever the most people vote for... should be... president...
It should be so simple! Why do we fuck it up!?
I think superdelegates should be encouraged by their constituencies to support the candidate who represents the winner of the primary/caucus in their state. Thus Chet Culver, governor of Iowa, yesterday said he will cast his super-vote for Obama, since Obama won the Iowa caucus. My suggestion is not going to make Bill Richardson's job any easier, though! :-) Bill is probably losing a little sleep these days wondering what to do. I'm sure he wants a cabinet post in the government of whichever candidate wins--good luck with your decision, Bill!
It might be worth explaining who superdelegates are, but this is neither a defense nor attack on having superdelegates. They're Democratic members of Congress, governors, members of the DNC, and dignitaries. The congressmen and governors at least did get elected by a district or state. DNC members are chosen by state parties in a process that I assume varies from state to state. I imagine state parties can say who their dignitaries are.
I must respectfully disagree. The super delegates, while free to change their mind, would have to actively collude to KNOW that enough were changing their decision so as to endorse the pledged delegate victor. Otherwise, individual "supers" would fear the awesome "score keeping" for which Mrs. & Mr. Clinton are so famous.
How sad that our party, the one that has championed the "let the people choose" mantra for years, will have our candidate chosen by a Soviet-like "Politburo" of party faithful.
Make no mistake: The super delegate system is designed so that the silver-haired in the party can squash a young up and comer who hasn't paid her/his dues, or who the party elites decide they would rather not run, even though the registered voters have picked them.
What a mess.
Leave it to Democrats to come up with a bonehead idea like "superdelegates." The whole notion only underscores the point that Democrats are in no way concerned with regular Americans and what any regular American might have to say, think, or feel about any issue. Clinton will get the Democratic nomination regardless of how Obama takes the primaries. Thus, the Democrats will be relegated to the dustbin of ignominy. Why can't Americans vote for "none of the above" just once?
I think that the Super Delegate plot is the Democratic Party's latest plan to grabb defeat from the jaws of victory. This is my party's latest dumb idea. They just have to take the Democracy out of the Democratic Party.
Bottom Line:
Like all of you. I know that health care is the most critical, and important issue facing the American people. Now, and in the coming elections. And like the vast majority of the American people, I want HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law NOW! "Single payer, Tax Supported, Not For Profit, True Universal Health Care" free for all as a right. Like every other developed country in the world has. See: http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm
"HR 676:
For church goers: less money to insur. companies and more to the church- lots more.
Srs on Medicare: save way over $100/wk. Because no more medigap, long term care & dental insur. needed. No more drug bills."
But if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our current politicians to get HR 676 passed into law before the elections. We will have to identify, and replace all the politicians standing in the way of passage of HR 676. And, I think the best first place to start is with the politicians that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bills for the kids. Passed by congress four times.
But what about the President. It was Bush after all that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bill passed by congress to assure more health coverage for Americas kids. So which of the presidential hopefuls do I think will be most supportive of implementing the demand of the majority of the American people to have HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law immediately!
We have some very fine presidential candidates who would make good presidents. But none of the top Presidential candidates directly support HR 676, the only true Universal Health Care plan. So I am supporting Hillary Clinton. She is the only top candidate that has ever actually fought for universal health care before.
I have enormous admiration, and respect for Hillary Clinton. She fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds back in 1993. To prevent this disastrous health care crisis that is now devastating the American people, and America. She fought so hard for the American people that she risk almost completely destroying her husbands presidency. I haven't forgotten her heroic effort. If any Presidential hopeful for universal health care deserves my support, it's her.
Also, if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our government to give us HR 676 which we all so desperately need NOW! Then we will need the most skilled politician we can get on our side to broker the best health care plan for the American people that we can get. Though it will be less than we need, and less than we deserve. The politician I think to best do this is Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are probably the most skilled politicians in American history.
The insurance industry, and medical industry that has been ripping you off, and killing you has given Hillary Clinton so much money because they fear her. They have also given Barack Obama so much money because they fear Hillary Clinton. They think they can manipulate Barack Obama against the best interest of the American people better than they can manipulate Hillary Clinton. There is no race issue with Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are the poster family for how African Americans want white people to be towards African Americans.
As always, African Americans are suffering, and dieing in this health care crisis at a much higher rate than any other group in America. The last time there was any significant drop in the African American death rate was when Bill Clinton was president.
My fellow Americans, you are dieing needlessly at an astounding rate. In higher numbers than any other people in the developed world. Rich, and poor a like. Insured, and uninsured. Young, and old. Men, women, children, and babies. And we the American people must stop it. And fix it NOW! Keep Fighting!!! Never! give up hope. There are millions of lives at stake. Bless you all... You are doing great!
jacksmith -- look where Hillary is getting a lot of her money from. It's the Healtcare industry. Hmm.......... Sounds like she may be batting for the other team now. 14 years is a long time.
FROM Max Blunt, www.RadicalLeft.net
- On NBC's Meet The Press, Obama stated: "There is not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush's position."
- Obama endorsed Joe Lieberman over anti-war candidate Ted Lamont.
- Obama has an almost identical voting record as Hillary Clinton.
- Obama voted for re-authorizing the patriot act and continued to fund the Iraq war until recently.
- Obama gets tons of money from nuclear, military, coal, and private insurance interests.
- Obama stated all options are on the table against Iran and also stated he would expand our military to unprecedented levels.
Progressives must be naive they think Obama winning is a win for everyone.
This is an example of poor journalism, so typical of the MSM. All hype and no facts.
So yeah, were all supposed tobuy in to the vague, often meaningless, 'inspirational' messages Obama claims to represent. Are we so easily conned?
Obama's article in "Foreign Affairs" makes it very clear that if elected, he will continue America's meddling in other nation's affairs by military force.
"To renew American leadership in the world, we must immediately begin working to revitalize our military. A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace. . . .
"We must use this moment both to rebuild our military and to prepare it for the missions of the future. . . .
"We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines. . . .
"I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened.
"We must also consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability -- to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities."
The Republican party has only two candidates left, neither one of them worth the effort to mark a ballot. McCain is an ego-maniac with a vile temper and Huckabee is way out of his league. It makes absolutely no difference which one of them won the Washington caucus.