Clinton campaign targets Obama's pledged delegates

[mawilson 2,133]

The whole idea of "superdelegates" is counter to the concept of the people picking the candidates. This seems like a slippery slope where the elite picks who we have to choose from. IMO it's a step away from real democracy.

I agree. I find it very ironic that the Democratic party nomination gets decided in a very undemocratic fashion.

The Republican party has a similar thing, unpleged delegates.

Well, yes, but there's no irony in that.

[GaryC 7]

The whole idea of "superdelegates" is counter to the concept of the people picking the candidates. This seems like a slippery slope where the elite picks who we have to choose from. IMO it's a step away from real democracy.

It's always been that way. Not that I don't agree that it isn't real democracy, but it's not a new development.

History

After the 1968 Democratic National Convention, the Democratic Party implemented changes in its delegate selection process, based on the work of the McGovern-Fraser Commission. The purpose of the changes was to make the composition of the convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast during the campaign for the nomination.

These comprehensive changes left some Democrats believing that the role of party leaders and elected officials had been unduly diminished, weakening the Democratic ticket. In response, the superdelegate rule was instituted after the 1980 election. Its purpose was to accord a greater role to active politicians.[3]

In the 1984 election, the major contenders for the Presidential nomination were Gary Hart and Walter Mondale. Each of them won some primaries and caucuses. Hart was only slightly behind Mondale in the total number of votes cast, but Mondale won the support of almost all the superdelegates and became the nominee.[4]

The superdelegates have not always prevailed, however. In the Democratic primary phase of the 2004 election, Howard Dean acquired an early lead in delegate counts by obtaining the support of a number of superdelegates before even the first primaries were held. Nevertheless, John Kerry defeated Dean in a succession of primaries and caucuses and won the nomination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

[Caladan 19]

The whole idea of "superdelegates" is counter to the concept of the people picking the candidates. This seems like a slippery slope where the elite picks who we have to choose from. IMO it's a step away from real democracy.

I agree. I find it very ironic that the Democratic party nomination gets decided in a very undemocratic fashion.

The Republican party has a similar thing, unpleged delegates. But since all the Republican races are winner takes all, you can run into a similar situation as the electoral college. Where one candidate may win the popular vote, but doesn't get enough electoral votes.

Yea. If McCain beats Huckabee by 1% in every race here on out, he'll finish with a vast majority of the delegates, even though he barely won.

[mawilson 2,133]

Yea. If McCain beats Huckabee by 1% in every race here on out, he'll finish with a vast majority of the delegates, even though he barely won.

What's even scarier is that someone like Huckabee could do the same - win a couple of big states

and get the nomination

[Caladan 19]

According the latest polls I remember seeing, Huckabee gets trounced by any possible Dem nominee in the general. And the moneyed-base of the party doesn't like him.

[no name 1]

Hillary Clinton Campaign Position On Pledged Delegates

2/19/2008 11:36:27 AM

There are inaccurate reports today about how the Hillary Clinton campaign intends to pursue the nomination. Here is our official position:

We have not, are not and will not pursue the pledged delegates of Barack Obama. It's now time for the Obama campaign to be clear about their intentions.

http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=6069