TV Schedule

The Un-democratic Democratic Superdelegates




  3. TooPolitical
  4. related topics
Recent discussions focused on who superdelegates will support at the party convention in June. Given the closeness of the race and disqualifications of more than 300 delegates from Michigan and Florida, it is unlikely that either Clinton or Obama will have the necessary 2025 delegates needed to win the nomination. Superdelegates make up about 20% or 800 of the total delegate counts, and are seen as the deciding factor in the democratic race.

It is perplexing and ironic that the eventual party nominee may be selected by a group of party insiders and some non-elected officials. The intent of proportionality of delegates (as opposed to winner takes all) was based on the principle of fairness and attempt to truly reflect the desire of voters in each congressional district. Superdelegates were meant to allow party leaders/insiders to play a key role in the nomination process – to perhaps influence candidates on specific policy issues or positions, but certainly not as kingmakers.

The increasingly diverse democratic constituency vis-à-vis the shrinking Republican Party tent will likely attract and excite certain demographic groups, and they will gravitate toward a particular candidate. The Clinton-Obama divide will not be the last, but the beginning struggle for party influence between Latinos and African Americans, elites/educated and working class, Baby Boomers, Gen X and Y, females and males, etc. The existence of superdelegates and the role they play in close contests will no doubt be viewed suspiciously by the losing candidate and their supporters. The Democratic Party should revamp the nomination process perhaps, first by jettisoning the superdelegates, and simply awarding the nomination to the candidate with the most votes. But again, politics is never this simple.
TooPolitical

1 response // The Un-democratic Democratic Superdelegates

  • "A government of the people, by the people and for the people" unless it isnt panning out the way some had wished so the superdelegates step in and correct "the people". This is democracy? The candidates donate to the campaigns of the superdelegates which amounts to a pay off! This is no different than the Supreme Court stepping in and dismissing the will of the people in 2000! This entire process is hypocritical.

    When former VP Al Gore did not run this election, I was disappointed. I beleive he is the best person to lead this country out of the darkness of the past seven years. Since then, I have listened to the candidates that did throw their hat in the ring. Rep Kucinich was my first choice but I knew that he would not get the promotion from the corporate owned media necessary to sell him to the public. When it came down to Senators Obama and Clinton, the choice was easy. Senator Clinton said during the final debate that there was "credible" evidence for the invasion of Iraq. That cemented my vote for Senator Obama. Now the talk is that Senator Clinton will receive the nomination because of the superdelegates regardless of the people's choice. This is UN-American.

    Former Vice President Gore said he had fallen out of love with politics. I can certainly understand why. Like all of America, I can just sit and wait to see how it all plays out. Learning that the will of the people can be so disregarded in this way has left a bad taste in my mouth. Like Gore, it may be time to walk away.
    fastcats3

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.