My Brother the Superdelegate (and Why I Don't Trust Him to Pick the Next President)

[Dan J 277]

Just looking at the numbers:

There's 796 super delegates and so far,

156 have pledged their support to Obama

and

242 have pledged their support to Hillary

....

That's a difference of 88 super delegates...that's it.

To be fair, MI and Fl voters cannot be disenfranchised just because the Dem establishment decided to do so.

The parties do get to set the rules as to how they will choose a candidate, so yes they can do that if they want. But then these states knew the consequences before changing their primary dates.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Just looking at the numbers:

There's 796 super delegates and so far,

156 have pledged their support to Obama

and

242 have pledged their support to Hillary

....

That's a difference of 88 super delegates...that's it.

To be fair, MI and Fl voters cannot be disenfranchised just because the Dem establishment decided to do so.

The parties do get to set the rules as to how they will choose a candidate, so yes they can do that if they want. But then these states knew the consequences before changing their primary dates.

Yep.

Think back, for a moment, to when this primary began. The Democratic party of Florida moved it's primary up to January in violation of DNC rules. In return the national party stripped Florida of it's 210 delegates to the August Democratic Party nominating convention.

At the time this decision was made, each of the Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton, agreed to ignore the Florida primary. Florida could have it's primary anytime it wanted, but it's 210 Democratic Party delegates will not be recognized at the party's convention. In other words, no candidate would be able to count Florida delegates in the final count. (The same went for Michigan which also defied the party.)

None of the candidates had a problem with this — until Barack Obama began to catch fire and close in on Hillary Clinton. Suddenly, what had looked like an easy win for Clinton, turned into a real horse race. Obama's delegate count began closing in on Hillary Clinton's.

Then Obama trounced Clinton in South Carolina, after which Democratic party seniors, like Ted Kennedy, came out for Obama and more indicated they were leaning his way.

That's when Hillary Clinton decided it was time to tear a page from the Bush/Cheney playbook. Since no Democrats had campaigned in Florida, Clinton was able to leverage her relationship with Florida's expatriate New Yorkers for an easy win. Coming, as it did, at a moment where events were trending away from her and towards Obama, Clinton decided it was time for a rule change:

Clinton alone in push for Florida delegates

Times Political Editor - Published January 26, 2008

Trying to ramp up the importance of Florida's Democratic presidential primary, Hillary Clinton on Friday called for her Democratic rivals to join her in helping get Florida delegates seated for the national convention.... "I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee," the New York senator said in a statement. "I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan." (Full)

Just as Neo-con Republicans rallied to Bush's side in the 2000 Florida fight, old-line machine Democrats jumped in to back up their candidate

Sen. Bill Nelson, who some Democrats expect to endorse Clinton Tuesday, praised her statement, called on other Democrats to follow her lead, and declared in a statement, "All the talk about Florida's Democratic Primary being meaningless is absurd....Many observers expect the eventual nominee will push to reinstate the delegates at the convention."

So there you have it. Hillary Clinton explicitly preparing the ground for a Bush-like Florida-powered coup. Those 210 Florida delegates would be more than enough to tip the balance in what is shaping up to be a neck to neck race to the August convention. And, since Clinton "won" the Florida non-primary, she'd get the lion's share of those delegates if the party caves and certifies them, as Clinton is demanding.

If Clinton prevails she would have cheated herself to the party nomination, just as Bush cheated his way into the presidency. And that would not be "Bush-lite" at all. It would be more like "Bush-heavy," a repeat of the Bush/Cheney campaign's 2000 Florida coup.

Memo to Howard Dean:

Howard — please listen very carefully. If the Democratic Party allows Hillary Clinton to get away with reseating the Florida and Michigan delegates then I — and I suspect tens of millions of other already unhappy Democrats — will be done with the Democratic party — this time for good.

You're already on shaky ground, amigo. We put you guys back in power last year and you've accomplished nothing. The war rages on, the economy is tanking, we still don't have a sane (or even humane) health care system, our country is now listed among those that employ torture, we are still being spied on by our own government and Democrats haven't impeached executive branch officials provably guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors.

In short, you're already on thin ice. Put the fix in now for Hillary Clinton by reseating those delegates and that'll be the final straw for millions of us.

Think we're kidding? Think again.

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3353/81/

[Alex+R 0]

']I disagree with the "Super Delegate" thing, just as I disagree with the Electoral college thing. This is 2008. We have computers. We have global communications. Decide elections on the ACTUAL vote, not on what your state thinks is right for you. [/u]ie: a 51%-49% popular vote in Indiana would mean that the 51% person got ALL of our electoral votes. That ain't right. If we had REAL democratic elections, we wouldn't have been stuck with monkey-boy in the white house for the past 7 years.

Basically, I disagree with anyone or anything that takes power away from the individual person. "Superdelegates" and the Electoral College do that.

Platy, I agree 100% with you on this. When the electoral college was first explained to me, I could not understand the logic to it (nor the cost efficiency). Perhaps it made sense generations ago. I think that this set up has contributed to the electoral apathy that the general population has shown over the years.

With regrad to Platy's point about superdelegates and electoral college, we are a representative democracy not a direct Athenian democracy . There is a nice article on that topic here .

This is what Alexander hamilton said:

"The body of people … do not possess the discernment and stability necessary for systematic government. To deny that they are frequently led into the grossest

errors by misinformation and passion, would be a flattery which their

own good sense must despise." --Alexander Hamilton.

It's also the reason why the senate was kept distant from the passions of the crowd with a 6 year term. As Washington said to Jefferson, the senate is designed to be a saucer to cool the passions of the moment that spill over from the House which is made much more susceptible to the passions of the masses with their shorter terms.

By the same token, I can conceive of the layer of superdelegates as that cooling system

However, if one goes by the logic of superdelegates conforming to the popular will of their constituents, then Senators, ted kennedy, John kerry and Gov. Deval should all vote for Hillary and publicly retract their endorsements of Barack.

Now that we've got near-100% literacy in this country... it just doesn't make any sense anymore. Rules created by those who fet the common man was not fit to rule himself.

[natty bumppo 297]

']I disagree with the "Super Delegate" thing, just as I disagree with the Electoral college thing. This is 2008. We have computers. We have global communications. Decide elections on the ACTUAL vote, not on what your state thinks is right for you. [/u]ie: a 51%-49% popular vote in Indiana would mean that the 51% person got ALL of our electoral votes. That ain't right. If we had REAL democratic elections, we wouldn't have been stuck with monkey-boy in the white house for the past 7 years.

Basically, I disagree with anyone or anything that takes power away from the individual person. "Superdelegates" and the Electoral College do that.

Platy, I agree 100% with you on this. When the electoral college was first explained to me, I could not understand the logic to it (nor the cost efficiency). Perhaps it made sense generations ago. I think that this set up has contributed to the electoral apathy that the general population has shown over the years.

With regrad to Platy's point about superdelegates and electoral college, we are a representative democracy not a direct Athenian democracy . There is a nice article on that topic here .

This is what Alexander hamilton said:

"The body of people … do not possess the discernment and stability necessary for systematic government. To deny that they are frequently led into the grossest

errors by misinformation and passion, would be a flattery which their

own good sense must despise." --Alexander Hamilton.

It's also the reason why the senate was kept distant from the passions of the crowd with a 6 year term. As Washington said to Jefferson, the senate is designed to be a saucer to cool the passions of the moment that spill over from the House which is made much more susceptible to the passions of the masses with their shorter terms.

By the same token, I can conceive of the layer of superdelegates as that cooling system

However, if one goes by the logic of superdelegates conforming to the popular will of their constituents, then Senators, ted kennedy, John kerry and Gov. Deval should all vote for Hillary and publicly retract their endorsements of Barack.

Now that we've got near-100% literacy in this country... it just doesn't make any sense anymore. Rules created by those who fet the common man was not fit to rule himself.

Point made ....

[GaryC 7]

']I disagree with the "Super Delegate" thing, just as I disagree with the Electoral college thing. This is 2008. We have computers. We have global communications. Decide elections on the ACTUAL vote, not on what your state thinks is right for you. [/u]ie: a 51%-49% popular vote in Indiana would mean that the 51% person got ALL of our electoral votes. That ain't right. If we had REAL democratic elections, we wouldn't have been stuck with monkey-boy in the white house for the past 7 years.

Basically, I disagree with anyone or anything that takes power away from the individual person. "Superdelegates" and the Electoral College do that.

Platy, I agree 100% with you on this. When the electoral college was first explained to me, I could not understand the logic to it (nor the cost efficiency). Perhaps it made sense generations ago. I think that this set up has contributed to the electoral apathy that the general population has shown over the years.

With regrad to Platy's point about superdelegates and electoral college, we are a representative democracy not a direct Athenian democracy . There is a nice article on that topic here .

This is what Alexander hamilton said:

"The body of people … do not possess the discernment and stability necessary for systematic government. To deny that they are frequently led into the grossest

errors by misinformation and passion, would be a flattery which their

own good sense must despise." --Alexander Hamilton.

It's also the reason why the senate was kept distant from the passions of the crowd with a 6 year term. As Washington said to Jefferson, the senate is designed to be a saucer to cool the passions of the moment that spill over from the House which is made much more susceptible to the passions of the masses with their shorter terms.

By the same token, I can conceive of the layer of superdelegates as that cooling system

However, if one goes by the logic of superdelegates conforming to the popular will of their constituents, then Senators, ted kennedy, John kerry and Gov. Deval should all vote for Hillary and publicly retract their endorsements of Barack.

Now that we've got near-100% literacy in this country... it just doesn't make any sense anymore. Rules created by those who fet the common man was not fit to rule himself.

Point made ....

Thats just mean Natty.

But then again so is this!

[no name 1]

Just looking at the numbers:

There's 796 super delegates and so far,

156 have pledged their support to Obama

and

242 have pledged their support to Hillary

....

That's a difference of 88 super delegates...that's it.

To be fair, MI and Fl voters cannot be disenfranchised just because the Dem establishment decided to do so.

The parties do get to set the rules as to how they will choose a candidate, so yes they can do that if they want. But then these states knew the consequences before changing their primary dates.

Yep.

Think back, for a moment, to when this primary began. The Democratic party of Florida moved it's primary up to January in violation of DNC rules. In return the national party stripped Florida of it's 210 delegates to the August Democratic Party nominating convention.

At the time this decision was made, each of the Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton, agreed to ignore the Florida primary. Florida could have it's primary anytime it wanted, but it's 210 Democratic Party delegates will not be recognized at the party's convention. In other words, no candidate would be able to count Florida delegates in the final count. (The same went for Michigan which also defied the party.)

None of the candidates had a problem with this — until Barack Obama began to catch fire and close in on Hillary Clinton. Suddenly, what had looked like an easy win for Clinton, turned into a real horse race. Obama's delegate count began closing in on Hillary Clinton's.

Then Obama trounced Clinton in South Carolina, after which Democratic party seniors, like Ted Kennedy, came out for Obama and more indicated they were leaning his way.

That's when Hillary Clinton decided it was time to tear a page from the Bush/Cheney playbook. Since no Democrats had campaigned in Florida, Clinton was able to leverage her relationship with Florida's expatriate New Yorkers for an easy win. Coming, as it did, at a moment where events were trending away from her and towards Obama, Clinton decided it was time for a rule change:

Clinton alone in push for Florida delegates

Times Political Editor - Published January 26, 2008

Trying to ramp up the importance of Florida's Democratic presidential primary, Hillary Clinton on Friday called for her Democratic rivals to join her in helping get Florida delegates seated for the national convention.... "I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee," the New York senator said in a statement. "I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan." (Full)

Just as Neo-con Republicans rallied to Bush's side in the 2000 Florida fight, old-line machine Democrats jumped in to back up their candidate

Sen. Bill Nelson, who some Democrats expect to endorse Clinton Tuesday, praised her statement, called on other Democrats to follow her lead, and declared in a statement, "All the talk about Florida's Democratic Primary being meaningless is absurd....Many observers expect the eventual nominee will push to reinstate the delegates at the convention."

So there you have it. Hillary Clinton explicitly preparing the ground for a Bush-like Florida-powered coup. Those 210 Florida delegates would be more than enough to tip the balance in what is shaping up to be a neck to neck race to the August convention. And, since Clinton "won" the Florida non-primary, she'd get the lion's share of those delegates if the party caves and certifies them, as Clinton is demanding.

If Clinton prevails she would have cheated herself to the party nomination, just as Bush cheated his way into the presidency. And that would not be "Bush-lite" at all. It would be more like "Bush-heavy," a repeat of the Bush/Cheney campaign's 2000 Florida coup.

Memo to Howard Dean:

Howard — please listen very carefully. If the Democratic Party allows Hillary Clinton to get away with reseating the Florida and Michigan delegates then I — and I suspect tens of millions of other already unhappy Democrats — will be done with the Democratic party — this time for good.

You're already on shaky ground, amigo. We put you guys back in power last year and you've accomplished nothing. The war rages on, the economy is tanking, we still don't have a sane (or even humane) health care system, our country is now listed among those that employ torture, we are still being spied on by our own government and Democrats haven't impeached executive branch officials provably guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors.

In short, you're already on thin ice. Put the fix in now for Hillary Clinton by reseating those delegates and that'll be the final straw for millions of us.

Think we're kidding? Think again.

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3353/81/

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...=109031&hl=

Two civil rights leaders -- one a prominent Obama supporter -- have written DNC Chairman Howard Dean to press him to resolve the looming conflict over Florida's and Michigan's role at the Democratic National Convention, in a letter (.pdf) obtained by Politico.

"We are deeply concerned about the prospect of a Democratic Party convention fight over the seating of delegates elected in the Michigan and Florida primaries," wrote Mary Frances Berry and Roger Wilkins, making pointed reference to "disenfranchisement of Older Americans, Latinos, and African Americans in Florida during the 2000 election and the subsequent issues of disenfranchisement in Ohio and elsewhere in the 2004 election."

But this letter is notable in part because one of its signatories, Wilkins, a former assistant attorney general who was the first black member of the Washington Post editorial board, is a prominent Obama supporter.

[GaryC 7]

Just looking at the numbers:

There's 796 super delegates and so far,

156 have pledged their support to Obama

and

242 have pledged their support to Hillary

....

That's a difference of 88 super delegates...that's it.

To be fair, MI and Fl voters cannot be disenfranchised just because the Dem establishment decided to do so.

The parties do get to set the rules as to how they will choose a candidate, so yes they can do that if they want. But then these states knew the consequences before changing their primary dates.

Yep.

Think back, for a moment, to when this primary began. The Democratic party of Florida moved it's primary up to January in violation of DNC rules. In return the national party stripped Florida of it's 210 delegates to the August Democratic Party nominating convention.

At the time this decision was made, each of the Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton, agreed to ignore the Florida primary. Florida could have it's primary anytime it wanted, but it's 210 Democratic Party delegates will not be recognized at the party's convention. In other words, no candidate would be able to count Florida delegates in the final count. (The same went for Michigan which also defied the party.)

None of the candidates had a problem with this — until Barack Obama began to catch fire and close in on Hillary Clinton. Suddenly, what had looked like an easy win for Clinton, turned into a real horse race. Obama's delegate count began closing in on Hillary Clinton's.

Then Obama trounced Clinton in South Carolina, after which Democratic party seniors, like Ted Kennedy, came out for Obama and more indicated they were leaning his way.

That's when Hillary Clinton decided it was time to tear a page from the Bush/Cheney playbook. Since no Democrats had campaigned in Florida, Clinton was able to leverage her relationship with Florida's expatriate New Yorkers for an easy win. Coming, as it did, at a moment where events were trending away from her and towards Obama, Clinton decided it was time for a rule change:

Clinton alone in push for Florida delegates

Times Political Editor - Published January 26, 2008

Trying to ramp up the importance of Florida's Democratic presidential primary, Hillary Clinton on Friday called for her Democratic rivals to join her in helping get Florida delegates seated for the national convention.... "I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee," the New York senator said in a statement. "I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan." (Full)

Just as Neo-con Republicans rallied to Bush's side in the 2000 Florida fight, old-line machine Democrats jumped in to back up their candidate

Sen. Bill Nelson, who some Democrats expect to endorse Clinton Tuesday, praised her statement, called on other Democrats to follow her lead, and declared in a statement, "All the talk about Florida's Democratic Primary being meaningless is absurd....Many observers expect the eventual nominee will push to reinstate the delegates at the convention."

So there you have it. Hillary Clinton explicitly preparing the ground for a Bush-like Florida-powered coup. Those 210 Florida delegates would be more than enough to tip the balance in what is shaping up to be a neck to neck race to the August convention. And, since Clinton "won" the Florida non-primary, she'd get the lion's share of those delegates if the party caves and certifies them, as Clinton is demanding.

If Clinton prevails she would have cheated herself to the party nomination, just as Bush cheated his way into the presidency. And that would not be "Bush-lite" at all. It would be more like "Bush-heavy," a repeat of the Bush/Cheney campaign's 2000 Florida coup.

Memo to Howard Dean:

Howard — please listen very carefully. If the Democratic Party allows Hillary Clinton to get away with reseating the Florida and Michigan delegates then I — and I suspect tens of millions of other already unhappy Democrats — will be done with the Democratic party — this time for good.

You're already on shaky ground, amigo. We put you guys back in power last year and you've accomplished nothing. The war rages on, the economy is tanking, we still don't have a sane (or even humane) health care system, our country is now listed among those that employ torture, we are still being spied on by our own government and Democrats haven't impeached executive branch officials provably guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors.

In short, you're already on thin ice. Put the fix in now for Hillary Clinton by reseating those delegates and that'll be the final straw for millions of us.

Think we're kidding? Think again.

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3353/81/

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...=109031&hl=

Two civil rights leaders -- one a prominent Obama supporter -- have written DNC Chairman Howard Dean to press him to resolve the looming conflict over Florida's and Michigan's role at the Democratic National Convention, in a letter (.pdf) obtained by Politico.

"We are deeply concerned about the prospect of a Democratic Party convention fight over the seating of delegates elected in the Michigan and Florida primaries," wrote Mary Frances Berry and Roger Wilkins, making pointed reference to "disenfranchisement of Older Americans, Latinos, and African Americans in Florida during the 2000 election and the subsequent issues of disenfranchisement in Ohio and elsewhere in the 2004 election."

But this letter is notable in part because one of its signatories, Wilkins, a former assistant attorney general who was the first black member of the Washington Post editorial board, is a prominent Obama supporter.

Forget it Dev. If they try to seat the FL and MI delegates there will be a war at the convention. The only way those delegates will be seated is if they do the election over. Hillary is not going to get them by default.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Forget it Dev. If they try to seat the FL and MI delegates there will be a war at the convention. The only way those delegates will be seated is if they do the election over. Hillary is not going to get them by default.

Exactly.

[no name 1]

Forget it Dev. If they try to seat the FL and MI delegates there will be a war at the convention. The only way those delegates will be seated is if they do the election over. Hillary is not going to get them by default.

Exactly.

Wait & see! Troll thinks so as well as many others.

[GaryC 7]

Forget it Dev. If they try to seat the FL and MI delegates there will be a war at the convention. The only way those delegates will be seated is if they do the election over. Hillary is not going to get them by default.

Exactly.

Wait & see! Troll thinks so as well as many others.

You would be OK with her winning like that? Everyone agreed to ignore FL and MI. Then she went ahead and put her name on the ballots and now she wants the delegates to count? I guess you were OK with the way Florida and the Supreme Court did things in 2000 then?