«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»
Time for A Superdelegate Pledge
As David notes here, the Washington Post's Paul Kane did the math and figured out that it will be basically impossible for either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to win enough pledged delegates to take the nomination outright. This is a big problem for the Democrats. Thankfully for them, I have a solution (after the jump).
First, some background: Pledged delegates are assigned to each candidate based on their performance in primaries in caucuses and are obliged to vote for the candidate that "owns" them. Superdelegates get their votes because they are Democratic party honchos or elected officials, and can vote for whomever they so choose. (You can learn even more from my colleague Jonathan Stein's excellent delegate primer).
As David correctly notes in his post, either Clinton or Obama will finish with a majority of non-super-delegates. But if enough superdelegates vote for the second-place finisher, it could vault him or her into the lead (and the nomination), and the nominee will have essentially been chosen against "the will of the majority (however slight it might be) of Democratic voters."
Such a result would almost certainly be a disaster for the Democrats. It would embitter the losing candidates' supporters, make the winner seem weak, make the party appear divided and undemocratic, and open the nominee to GOP attacks that he or she "wasn't even picked by the majority of his or her party." It would seriously endanger the Democrats' chances in November.
Thankfully for the Democrats, I (Update: And, apparently, David Sirota) have a solution. Starting tomorrow, both campaigns and the national party should call for all superdelegates to sign a pledge that they will support the candidate who receives the most non-super delegates. Even if only one of the campaigns endorses the pledge, it will be very hard for the other campaign to argue against it without looking conniving and undemocratic. Once the campaigns are on board, it will be very hard for the national party to disagree or the superdelegates to avoid signing the pledge. The pressure to sign would be extraordinary. Such a pledge will ensure that the campaigns spend the rest of the primary season battling for the votes of ordinary people, not struggling for the backing of party honchos. It will ensure that the eventual nominee represents the preference of the majority of the party. And it will be better for voters, better for party unity, and better for the Democrats' chances in November. There: problem solved.
Comments
Excellent idea - I hope this catches on. I'm on board.
Posted by: capt on 02/08/08 at 11:54 AM Respond
Since when did the power-players in either Wing of the nation's Single Ruling Party care about what the Little People wanted, beyond whatever SHOW of 'caring' was necessary to manipulate them into following along with what benefits the power-players?
Posted by: Alternate Reality Check on 02/08/08 at 12:12 PM Respond
I respectfully disagree. It is probable that almost 1/2 of the democratic voters will have rejected the leading candidate. The Super delegates ought to pick the candidate that offers three things:
1. The best chance of unifying the party.
2. The best prospect for winning the election.
3. The best program for governing the nation.
That candidate does NOT HAVE TO BE EITHER of the current candidates. They can draft Gore, or Jimmy Carter if they are a mind to. A brokered convention should not be artificially hampered by pledges to honor a process that is ex post facto. Got that, Michigan and Florida? And Sen. Clinton? Stick to the current rules, but be transparent about it. And please, please, let everyone be clear about the rules.
Posted by: denis on 02/08/08 at 1:55 PM Respond
Congressman Kucinich? Is that you?
Posted by: mike on 02/08/08 at 8:38 PM Respond
Um, why have superdelegates at all if they are to be forced to vote the same as the popular vote?
Posted by: Gary on 02/09/08 at 9:12 AM Respond
Gary: I think that's the point. Superdelegates are an outdated relic but (at least for this cycle) we're stuck with them. A pledge to follow the popular vote would be a great first step toward getting rid of superdelegates altogether.
Posted by: eric on 03/07/08 at 10:15 AM Respond
ARCHIVE
February 24, 2008 - March 1, 2008
February 17, 2008 - February 23, 2008
February 10, 2008 - February 16, 2008
February 3, 2008 - February 9, 2008
January 27, 2008 - February 2, 2008
January 20, 2008 - January 26, 2008
January 13, 2008 - January 19, 2008
January 6, 2008 - January 12, 2008
December 30, 2007 - January 5, 2008
December 23, 2007 - December 29, 2007
December 16, 2007 - December 22, 2007
December 9, 2007 - December 15, 2007
December 2, 2007 - December 8, 2007
November 25, 2007 - December 1, 2007
November 18, 2007 - November 24, 2007
November 11, 2007 - November 17, 2007
November 4, 2007 - November 10, 2007
October 28, 2007 - November 3, 2007
October 21, 2007 - October 27, 2007
October 14, 2007 - October 20, 2007
October 7, 2007 - October 13, 2007
September 30, 2007 - October 6, 2007
September 23, 2007 - September 29, 2007
September 16, 2007 - September 22, 2007
September 9, 2007 - September 15, 2007
September 2, 2007 - September 8, 2007
August 26, 2007 - September 1, 2007
August 19, 2007 - August 25, 2007
August 12, 2007 - August 18, 2007
August 5, 2007 - August 11, 2007
July 29, 2007 - August 4, 2007
RECENT COMMENTS
Time for A Superdelegate Pledge (6)
eric wrote:
Gary: I think that's the point. Superdelegates are an out...
[more]
In "Monster"-Gate, Clintonites Get Away with a Slur, While Respected Obama Aide Falls (7)
Martin Edwin "Mick" Andersen wrote:
HILLARY, WHAT A TANGLED WEB YOU WEAVE, WHEN YOU CONTINUE T...
[more]
Obama to Reporter: I'm Sorry for "Messing Up Your Game" (24)
kirkbrew wrote:
Slow news day???...
[more]
Departing US Iran Envoy Says Nuclear Issue Will Not Be Resolved By Time Bush Leaves Office (8)
Blue Sun wrote:
Iran, like the United States and 187 other nations, is a s...
[more]
Final Texas Delegate Count (1)
kirkbrew wrote:
If I was McCain, I’d say – “Look folks. You will get from...
[more]
Obama to Clinton: We've Got Our Own Kitchen Sink (17)
Jill Smith-Tornabene wrote:
I am very concerned about this election. It seems that we...
[more]
Clinton's Triple Win Sets Up a Long, Ugly Slog to Pennsylvania (97)
abuelita38 wrote:
All this going back and forth about the two candidates is ...
[more]
Whoops — Obama Adviser Did Talk NAFTA With Canadian Gov't (18)
capt - Hussein wrote:
NAFTA-Gate Shocker: Did Hillary’s Camp Lie and Frame Obam...
[more]
Nebraska Teacher Taken Out Of Classroom For Showing Iraq Documentary (24)
çince tercüme wrote:
Your comment contains very useful information about all th...
[more]
The Three Trillion Dollar War (16)
Buy Amoxiciclin wrote:
Thanks...
[more]
Movable Type 3.33


RECENT ENTRIES
Clinton Campaign Keeps On Pushing Bogus Rationale
More on McCain's Climate Change Speech Today
China Outlaws Pringles and Fanta
The Weird McCain-Dictator Connection
Bob Barr Throws Down Gauntlet to Ron Paul
Obama-McCain Could Create Some Fun Moments
McCain Portrays Himself as Environmental Champion, but Record Undercuts Credibility
"Sacking" of Washington Mid East Hand Points Up Growing Rift Between D.C. Ideology and Israeli Pragmatism
Harry Reid Promises Hearings on Pentagon Puppets