Hotspring 44
02-15-2016, 08:38 PM
Are Super-delegates going to wreak havoc in the democrat party?...
...:2cents:There is potential for it... ...Example given @: What if Sanders wins the popular vote, but loses the delegate count due to super delegates? (https://www.democraticunderground.com/12511190126)
There is that “thingy” called "Super-delegates" (unpledged PLEO delegates (Rule 9.A)) that can make popular majority vote in democrat party not count as a win if the super-delegates swing the balance to the other, lesser voted for candidate's side.... ...Oh, if you have more patients and higher download connection than I do then you can try a search for rule 9 here> https://demrulz.org/wp-content/files/12.15.14_2016_Delegate_Selection_Documents_Mailing_-_Rules_Call_Regs_Model_Plan_Checklist_12.15.14.pdf
:wtf:(WTF??) You say?
Here are some links and excerpts from some of them that in their own ways explain how that could happen.
In February of 2016, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Wasserman_Schultz), chair of the Democratic National Committee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee), was asked by CNN's Jake Tapper, "What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it's all rigged?" Schultz's response was, "Superdelegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists."[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-16) This clarification was hailed by Clinton supporters as a wise policy to maintain steady, experienced governance, and derided by Sanders supporters as the establishment thwarting the will of the people. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#History
The term "superdelegate" itself was used originally as a criticism of unpledged delegates. Susan Estrich (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Estrich) argued that these delegates, who would be predominantly white and male, would have more power than other delegates because of their greater freedom to vote as they wish.[33] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-Karmack-33)
The Democratic Party has faced accusations that it has been conducting its nominating process in an undemocratic way,[10] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-Berman-10)[34] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-34)[35] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-35) because superdelegates are generally chosen without regard to their preferences in the presidential race and are not obligated to support the candidate chosen by the voters.
In 2008, Television (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television) commentator Dan Abrams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Abrams) called it "troubling" that the superdelegates might decide the 2008 race, arguing, "Each of the superdelegates' votes is now equivalent to about 10,000 Democratic voters."[36] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-36) There are online petitions calling on the superdelegates to support the candidate who does best in the primaries and caucuses.[37] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-37) On the other hand, Geraldine Ferraro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Ferraro), who had served on the Hunt Commission and at the time sat on Hillary Clinton's campaign finance committee, defended the inclusion of superdelegates as being beneficial to the party; she argued that they should exercise independent judgment in voting for a presidential nominee.[38] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-38)
Delegates chosen in primaries and caucuses may not exactly reflect the votes cast, but Democratic party rules require proportional allocation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation) rather than winner-take-all.[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-Cook-39) Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#Criticism
And then there is:
In 1984 once again three candidates were running for the Democratic nomination. Jimmy Carter’s Vice President Walter Mondale, Jesse Jackson of Illinois, and Senator Gary Hart from Colorado. Walter Mondale was the establishment candidate and party favorite. Jesse Jackson was the first African American to run for Democratic Nominee and managed to secure Louisiana and Mississippi. Gary Hart was a relatively unknown Senator poling at 1% when he entered the race. Despite criticisms of being vague and too centrist he was able to win a decent chunk of the primary elections. Including the important state of New Hampshire and most of the Western United States. Ultimately he ended up carrying 26 states, 7 more than Mondale, but lost the primary election by over 500 delegates. Hart still received 3% less of the popular vote, but the disparity in delegates shows the potential problem super delegates can pose. They are naturally slanted towards establishment candidates and as it stands now it’s obvious who that establishment slant helps in 2016. Link: https://studentsforberniesanders.com/SuperDelegatesAndBernieSanders
Bernie Sanders Is Having Hillary Clinton Steal The Election Because Of Superdelegates (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfcOhzjSa9s)
...:2cents:There is potential for it... ...Example given @: What if Sanders wins the popular vote, but loses the delegate count due to super delegates? (https://www.democraticunderground.com/12511190126)
There is that “thingy” called "Super-delegates" (unpledged PLEO delegates (Rule 9.A)) that can make popular majority vote in democrat party not count as a win if the super-delegates swing the balance to the other, lesser voted for candidate's side.... ...Oh, if you have more patients and higher download connection than I do then you can try a search for rule 9 here> https://demrulz.org/wp-content/files/12.15.14_2016_Delegate_Selection_Documents_Mailing_-_Rules_Call_Regs_Model_Plan_Checklist_12.15.14.pdf
:wtf:(WTF??) You say?
Here are some links and excerpts from some of them that in their own ways explain how that could happen.
In February of 2016, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Wasserman_Schultz), chair of the Democratic National Committee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee), was asked by CNN's Jake Tapper, "What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it's all rigged?" Schultz's response was, "Superdelegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists."[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-16) This clarification was hailed by Clinton supporters as a wise policy to maintain steady, experienced governance, and derided by Sanders supporters as the establishment thwarting the will of the people. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#History
The term "superdelegate" itself was used originally as a criticism of unpledged delegates. Susan Estrich (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Estrich) argued that these delegates, who would be predominantly white and male, would have more power than other delegates because of their greater freedom to vote as they wish.[33] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-Karmack-33)
The Democratic Party has faced accusations that it has been conducting its nominating process in an undemocratic way,[10] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-Berman-10)[34] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-34)[35] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-35) because superdelegates are generally chosen without regard to their preferences in the presidential race and are not obligated to support the candidate chosen by the voters.
In 2008, Television (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television) commentator Dan Abrams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Abrams) called it "troubling" that the superdelegates might decide the 2008 race, arguing, "Each of the superdelegates' votes is now equivalent to about 10,000 Democratic voters."[36] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-36) There are online petitions calling on the superdelegates to support the candidate who does best in the primaries and caucuses.[37] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-37) On the other hand, Geraldine Ferraro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Ferraro), who had served on the Hunt Commission and at the time sat on Hillary Clinton's campaign finance committee, defended the inclusion of superdelegates as being beneficial to the party; she argued that they should exercise independent judgment in voting for a presidential nominee.[38] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-38)
Delegates chosen in primaries and caucuses may not exactly reflect the votes cast, but Democratic party rules require proportional allocation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation) rather than winner-take-all.[39] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#cite_note-Cook-39) Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate#Criticism
And then there is:
In 1984 once again three candidates were running for the Democratic nomination. Jimmy Carter’s Vice President Walter Mondale, Jesse Jackson of Illinois, and Senator Gary Hart from Colorado. Walter Mondale was the establishment candidate and party favorite. Jesse Jackson was the first African American to run for Democratic Nominee and managed to secure Louisiana and Mississippi. Gary Hart was a relatively unknown Senator poling at 1% when he entered the race. Despite criticisms of being vague and too centrist he was able to win a decent chunk of the primary elections. Including the important state of New Hampshire and most of the Western United States. Ultimately he ended up carrying 26 states, 7 more than Mondale, but lost the primary election by over 500 delegates. Hart still received 3% less of the popular vote, but the disparity in delegates shows the potential problem super delegates can pose. They are naturally slanted towards establishment candidates and as it stands now it’s obvious who that establishment slant helps in 2016. Link: https://studentsforberniesanders.com/SuperDelegatesAndBernieSanders
Bernie Sanders Is Having Hillary Clinton Steal The Election Because Of Superdelegates (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfcOhzjSa9s)