| |
Discussion: U.S. Election 2016: Primary Season
Member Since: 8/29/2011
Posts: 18,282
|
Quote:
Originally posted by King Maxx
Yes 1972 is a long time ago. Super delegates have been a thing for the last 44 years, and not once has a candidate had more pledged delegates and lost because of super delegates. And it's def not happening this election cycle. Super delegates are fine. If Bernie was winning in overall pledged delegates, we should then have this conversation.
Like I've been saying for some time, super delegates are simply just there to prevent someone like Trump from ever ruining the Democratic Party. Aren't Bernie, his team, and supporters saying that those votes aren't final until the convention? If Bernie wins states and comes within a few delegates behind Hillary, then yes the super delegates should change. However, it's not an issue right now.
And I don't need to support or oppose anything that has little to no effect.
|
If super delegates are so pointless, then why even have them? The Party might as well get rid of them just to end the controversy once and for all. That way voters won't fear being disenfranchised by the establishment.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/29/2011
Posts: 18,282
|
Quote:
|
For the first time in three years, Obama’s daily approval rating in the Gallup poll rose above 50%. That is a significant shift from its low of 38% in the fall of 2014 and is higher than the 47% average for presidents at this point in their final year in office
|
Obama Approval Rating
 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/21/2012
Posts: 28,099
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ramcoro
If super delegates are so pointless, then why even have them? The Party might as well get rid of them just to end the controversy once and for all. That way voters won't fear being disenfranchised by the establishment.
|
They aren't pointless. They are a last resort to stop someone who they fear will ruin their party or won't win against the opponent. For example a Democratic version of Trump.....
And many voters don't even care that much about it. Bernie tried it with that establishment talk, and guess who's winning the those delegates and nomination...Guess what president has a 51 approval rating.... List goes on.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
I think the superdelegate system is pretty sensible though. It's literally designed to prevent a Trump-type candidacy from happening within the Democratic Party, and it makes sense that the party would want to protect their interests on a national stage when selecting who's going to represent them both in the election and for the next 4 to 8 years globally.
Plus, we can't really argue that it's hurt Bernie all that much - most people either don't know about or don't care about superdelegates, and those who know are more likely to be Bernie supporters who disagree with that system in the first place. He'd still be losing either way, so we've not yet seen any primary in which the superdelegates had a consequential, prohibitive effect. They're a built-in safeguard, more or less, that hasn't needed to be activated yet.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/12/2012
Posts: 7,989
|
Quote:
Originally posted by King Maxx
More protests for Trump. Hillary has been MIA for the most part. She goes back on the campaign trail tomorrow. Nothing else really happened. Tomorrow all 5 candidates will be doing a interview on CNN. (Bernie will be interviewed on the campaign trail, but the other 4 will be in one building together)  |
Quote:
Originally posted by HeyMr.DJ
Nope... Hillary's been holding fund raisers and resting up for this week. She's back on the campaign trail (in arizona) starting tomorrow. Nothing interesting has happened besides a new speech from trump and Bernie gave a press conference right on the border of arizona and mexico..
|
Thanks you two! Glad to see I haven't missed anything. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by King Maxx
Yes 1972 is a long time ago. Super delegates have been a thing for the last 44 years, and not once has a candidate had more pledged delegates and lost because of super delegates. And it's def not happening this election cycle. Super delegates are fine. If Bernie was winning in overall pledged delegates, we should then have this conversation.
Like I've been saying for some time, super delegates are simply just there to prevent someone like Trump from ever ruining the Democratic Party. Aren't Bernie, his team, and supporters saying that those votes aren't final until the convention? If Bernie wins states and comes within a few delegates behind Hillary, then yes the super delegates should change. However, it's not an issue right now.
And I don't need to support or oppose anything that has little to no effect.
|
My issue has nothing to do with Sanders or Clinton. I know that super-delegates would switch towards whoever the popular vote nominee is (athough I have my doubts that all of Clinton's 450 delegates would be switching) - it's the idea that I'm opposing. If the vast majority of the party wanted someone like Trump to be THEIR nominee, then yes, Trump should be the nominee. People in higher positions shouldn't be dictating anyone who to pick, nor have the right to shut down whom people pick, these are the Democratic values we're trying to fight for here.
Your position in the party should not be potentially cancelling out the voice of 5-10k voters. That's pure fraud, even if most Supers switch to whoever people pick, they still have the right and legal power to shut them down, that's not okay.
I am also in favor of national legislation banning any private political party from adopting that system.
Edit: and to challenge your go-to Trump point, if Clinton and Trump were both running for the Democratic nomination and Clinton won the national vote/pledged delegates, Superdelegates can potentially switch the nomination and give it to Trump. The argument is completely invalid.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Democrats need superdelegates as long as there are no WTA states
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/21/2012
Posts: 28,099
|
Obama is landing on Cuba as we speak!!! Historic day.
EDIT: Good point! We would have to get rid of the proportional delegation system as well. I just don't see the DNC changing a whole system that has worked and continues to work. Not everything needs changing. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
"Not everything needs changing"
Yeah but this does.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/21/2012
Posts: 28,099
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
"Not everything needs changing"
Yeah but this does.
|
Well I disagree so let's just leave it there. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/28/2008
Posts: 4,530
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
Edit: and to challenge your go-to Trump point, if Clinton and Trump were both running for the Democratic nomination and Clinton won the national vote/pledged delegates, Superdelegates can potentially switch the nomination and give it to Trump. The argument is completely invalid.
|
I don't see how this is invalid. Your example doesn't reflect reality, but in this alternate universe where Trump is running for the Democratic nomination and Clinton is an awful candidate that shouldn't represent the party, then yeah superdelegates would step in in that situation.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
If I was American, I can honestly guarantee you I would NOT be a Democrat. Too corporate for my standards, and the delegation issue would completely scare me off hence voter rights are one of the issues I feel most strongly about.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mickey
I don't see how this is invalid. Your example doesn't reflect reality, but in this alternate universe where Trump is running for the Democratic nomination and Clinton is an awful candidate that shouldn't represent the party, then yeah superdelegates would step in in that situation.
|
I'm not arguing what's most likely going to happen in our current situation, but rather demonstrating the potential power that Superdelegates posses.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/21/2012
Posts: 28,099
|
Wait you're not even American.  Wow how can I even argue with someone who's not even apart of our political system?  And you wouldn't be a Democrat, but are pro-voter rights?  Do your research. PLEASE! Because you are sadly mistaken if you think you could be anything else in America with that view.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by King Maxx
Wait you're not even American. And you wouldn't be Democratic, but are pro-voter rights. Do your research. PLEASE! Because you are sadly mistaken if you think you could be anything else in America with that view. |
You do realize that any person can be an..... independent voter, right? 
And what do you mean by "you're not even American"? I was part of "your" political system for an entire year (and yes, you can still argue with me without me being "part of your political system").
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 21,143
|
It doesn't matter where someone is from, they can have a valid opinion on an event going on somewhere else. My specialization is Middle Eastern studies, but I live in the United States - is it fair for someone to tell me "Oh, you don't even live in Iran, your opinion doesn't matter"? No, and the same logic applies here.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/5/2011
Posts: 15,589
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RatedG²
Utah? From my analysis of a few presidential elections, Utah is, by far, the MOST conservative state in this country. It would never turn blue, and especially with Sanders  |
I saw that poll too, its up on Politico.
Cruz and Kasich beat Hillary and Bernie in Utah by like 50+ points in the GE
But if Trump is the nominee the state goes blue.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,037
|
Is Hillary expected to win this coming Super Tuesday?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Citrus
It doesn't matter where someone is from, they can have a valid opinion on an event going on somewhere else. My specialization is Middle Eastern studies, but I live in the United States - is it fair for someone to tell me "Oh, you don't even live in Iran, your opinion doesn't matter"? No, and the same logic applies here.
|
Thank you. I was actually a bit offended by what they said, granted I know more about American politics that most Americans do.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/21/2012
Posts: 28,099
|
Well call me whatever you want on this issue, but if the Democratic Party is fine with what the Democratic Party does and does not do, then yes your opinion does not really change anything. You can have your opinion on super delegates, but it's by far the least of our worries.
It's like Bernie coming to the Democratic Party after being an Independent for all these decades and trying to change what we do. I don't like it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
