Max Follmer

BIO

Max Follmer

The Huffington Post

huffpolitics, Barack Obama delegates, barack obama super delegates, barack obama superdelegates, Clinton super delegates, Clinton superdelegates, delegate count, delegate counts, delegate rules, delegate selection, florida delegates, Florida super delegates, Hillary Clinton delegates, Hillary Clinton super delegates, Hillary Clinton superdelegates, Michigan delegates, Michigan super delegates, Obama Delegates, obama super delegates, super, super delegate rules, super delegates Obama superdelegates, superdelegate rules, superdelegate selection, superdelegates, what is a super delegate, what is a superdelegate
huffpolitics, Barack Obama delegates, barack obama super delegates, barack obama superdelegates, Clinton super delegates, Clinton superdelegates, delegate count, delegate counts, delegate rules, delegate selection, florida delegates, Florida super delegates, Hillary Clinton delegates, Hillary Clinton super delegates, Hillary Clinton superdelegates, Michigan delegates, Michigan super delegates, Obama Delegates, obama super delegates, super, super delegate rules, super delegates Obama superdelegates, superdelegate rules, superdelegate selection, superdelegates, what is a super delegate, what is a superdelegate

Everything You've Ever Wanted To Know About Delegates And Superdelegates

February 13, 2008 04:30 PM


digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

Here's everything you always wanted to ask but never dared to about the Democratic delegates and superdelegates.

Who are the Democratic delegates and are they the same as superdelegates?

Yes and no to that last question. All superdelegates are delegates but not vice versa. Among the regular delegates, there are two sub-categories: pledged and non-pledged. All three types of delegates will attend the Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer. A majority of their votes will be required to name the Democratic nominee for President.

How many delegates are there in total?

The convention will host delegations from each of the 50 states, several US territories, and a contingent of "Democrats Abroad." Because some delegates, those from American Samoa, Democrats Abroad, Guam, and the Virgin Islands cast only fractional votes, there will be 4,070 delegates casting a total of 4,047 vote.

How does a candidate win these delegates?

The short answer is by winning primaries and caucuses as each state has a certain amount of delegates apportioned to it.

The longer answer is more complex and often confusing. Not all states apportion the delegates in exactly the same way. And, sorry, but there are different sub-categories among these delegates: pledged and unpledged.

OK, we'll bite. What's the difference?

Pledged delegates are awarded proportionally to candidates based on the results of the primary or caucus results in each state and primary and will support a particular candidate at the national convention.

Pledged delegates are selected both at the Congressional District, and statewide levels.

So even though Candidate X might win a particular state, Candidate Y can still pick up a number of delegates based on their performance in individual congressional districts. Because different districts are weighted differently than others, a candidate can even lose a state by popular vote but still win a majority of delegates. This is the case in Nevada, for example, where Hillary Clinton won by a 10 point margin, but where Barack Obama picked up 13 over her 12 delegates.

We're afraid to ask, but are there different types of pledged delegates?

Yes. There are three types of pledged delegates:

Congressional District Level delegates are chosen at the local level, based on the voting results in that particular district.

At-large delegates are elected at the state level to reflect the proportion of the statewide vote a presidential candidate received.

There are also a number of statewide spots reserved for state elected officials (such as mayors and state legislators) who pledge their support to an individual candidate. They are also elected in proportion to the statewide vote.

Do pledged delegates have to vote a certain way? Can they change their minds?

According to the DNC, "this is one of the biggest myths of the delegate selection process. Delegates are NOT bound to vote for the candidate they are pledged to at the Convention or on the first ballot." Delegates sign a pledge of support, but there is no rule requiring them to honor that pledge.

OK, Ok, however arcane the system might be, in the end, whichever Democratic candidate wins the most of these delegates from the primary and caucus process will win the nomination, right?

Not necessarily. The magic number to clinch the nomination at the convention will be 2,025. But most mathematical projections now agree that it is virtually impossible for either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to finish with this many delegates. One or the other candidate might, indeed, finish with a plurality but not an outright majority.

How is that possible? If there's only two candidates how can one of them not have a majority when it's all over?

Thanks for asking about the superdelegates! About one out five of the Democratic delegates - 794 to be exact--are these so-called superdelegates and their votes will make the difference in reaching a majority. They vote at the convention at the same time the other delegates do, but they got there a different way. The superdelegates are seated automatically, based solely on their status as current or former elected officeholders and party officials

The 794 superdelegates consist of :

• All members of the Democratic National Committee (elections to the
DNC are held in each state and territory).
• All Democratic members of the House of Representatives
• All Democratic members of the United States Senate
• All Democratic governors
• All former Democratic presidents
• All former Democratic leaders of the United States Senate
• All former Democratic Speakers of the House
• All former Democratic House Minority Leaders
• All former Chairs of the Democratic National Committee

Do superdelegates have to vote a certain way? Can they change their minds?

Superdelegates do not have to pledge to vote a particular way at the convention (although many announce their support for a candidate in advance). Regardless of any stated endorsement, superdelegates can vote however they choose and are free to change their minds.

Who created these superdelegates, anyway? Isn't the whole thing undemocratic?

After the disastrous, 1968 Democratic convention, the so-called McGovern-Fraser Commission instituted a series of reforms to make the nomination process more transparent and democrats, less beholden to party leaders. But the Democratic establishment thought things went too far and in 1980 created the superdelegates system precisely to give the party machine a way to put the brakes on too much bottom-up initiative if necessary. The whole idea was to return a portion of power to the unelected party managers and incumbent office holders.

Have superdelegates ever decided a Democratic nomination?

Yes, in 1984. Walter Mondale was slightly ahead of Gary Hart at the time of the Democratic convention and superdelegate support put Mondale over the finish line. The Democrats lost that election. In 2004, the opposite occurred. Howard Dean won the most number of superdelegate pledges but John Kerry won an outright majority of delegates through the primary and caucus elections. Kerry also lost the general election.

Hey, what about those delegates from Michigan and Florida? We've heard their votes aren't going to count. Why not?

Both states were punished by the DNC when they advanced their primary calendars too far ahead of the schedule decided on by the national party and were told that their candidates would not be seated at the convention.

Now the DNC says the state parties in Florida and Michigan have two options if they want their delegates to be seated:

1) Appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee. The Convention Credentials Committee determines and resolves any outstanding questions concerning the seating of delegates and alternates to the Convention. The Credentials Committee is expected to meet sometime in July or August prior to the Convention, when it could take up the matters of Florida and/or Michigan.

Members of the credentials committee are selected by the delegates from each state.

2) Michigan and Florida could still choose to run a new party process (some sort of election or caucus), as Delaware did in 1996, to select delegates to the convention. This process must be held between now and the second Tuesday in June, in accordance with DNC rules.

Comments for this post are now closed


 
Comments
17
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
photo

The number of ironies in this convulsion of sense is enough to whack the magnetic poles of the earth out of orbit. Not only is electoral process of the "Democratic Party" not democratic, but their aversion to being democratic came about as "a series of reforms to make the nomination process more transparent" - where in reality to it is so hard to follow the bouncing the ball that it is like adding tar to water.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:21 AM on 02/15/2008

questions still not answered:
1) can superdelegates vote anonymously or do they have to do it in public?
2) superdelegates may vote for who their local constituents voted for e.g. Zoe Lofgren, George Miller Northern California politicians may vote how their districts voted i.e. FOR OBAMA-- has that been figured into the equation?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:18 PM on 02/14/2008

questions still not answered:
1) can superdelegates vote anonymously or do that have to do it in public?
2) superdelegates may vote for who their local constituents voted for e.g. Zoe Lofgren, George Miller Northern California politicians may vote how their districts voted i.e. FOR OBAMA-- has that been figured into the equation?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:17 PM on 02/14/2008
photo


The delegate system is an intraparty version of the antiquated, unrepresentative, undemocratic and quite frankly immoral Electoral College, that was invented in the 18th Century to give "slave states" a veto power over the Presidency.

We should have ONE national primary day in the Sping and a direct popular vote election in November, with runoffs for each in some form, two-round voting or ranked-choice voting, if no one gets 50% of the vote.

End this insanity forever. It's the 21st Century and the Civil War ended 150 years ago. A 21st Century America should be empowering citizens and voters, not "electors", delegates, or "swing states" or "small states" or any "state".

The Presidency of the United States is our highest national office and we need national primaries and elections to pick that office holder. We need a Presidential election system suitable for the 21st Century, not the 19th one.

Most other countries with a President has that President directly elected, as in Ireland, France, Brazil, etc. I trust the American people with the same empowerment.

No more convention delegate or Electoral College systems for nominating and choosing a president.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:41 PM on 02/14/2008

As a member of the Green Party, I regard the issue of the Democratic Party superdelegates with irony.

We Greens are fervent believers in democracy. But, we never forgot how SDS and the Peace and Freedom Party were destroyed by agents provocateurs. We saw how the Democratic Party has been separated from its very values, by the DLC.

In California, the Greens achieved ballot status in 1992. We were determined to keep troublemakers out of our party. We wanted to STAND FOR SOMETHING, grow at our own pace, and control our political races and candidates. We allowed our county councils to close partisan primaries. We had "None of the Above" on the ballot in Green primaries. If NotA won, no Green would advance to the general election.

What happened? California SUED us for "conducting disorderly elections." The lawsuit started under a Republican governor and a Democratic Secretary of State. In the following election cycle, we got a Democratic governor and a Republican Secretary of State, BUT the lawsuit was continued until the Greens cried Uncle, thank you.

South Carolina Democrats employ a very similar rule to the California Greens' closed-primary rule I mentioned above. When Stephen Colbert wanted to run as a Democrat in South Carolina, Democratic Party bosses denied him the ballot!

So, if the Democratic rank and file get shafted by their own superdelegates... I could say, it serves you all right. Democrats and Republicans want to write EVERYONE's rules, not just their own -- yet YOU are STILL members of the Democratic Party. Leave.

Alternately, I could say that it MIGHT be acceptable for the Democrats to use a somewhat-exclusive INTERNAL process for picking their political leaders. That's exactly what we Greens wanted to do!

As long as the business of actual GOVERNMENT is conducted democratically, should we care if the individual parties pick their candidates in smoke-filled back rooms? If that primary process offends certain voters -- AND those voters have someplace to go where they can make their own internal rules, what's the problem?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 02/14/2008

one person, one vote. period. get rid of these superdelegates subverting democracy. get rid of the electoral college. what a mess.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:03 PM on 02/13/2008

EXACTLY! Where is the equality here. I have lived in seven different states and never had my primary vote matter. I'm disgusted with seeing the candidates campaign for years through the snow/corn fields/barbeques/countryside of Iowa and New Hampshire. There is no equality here or representation for the majority. And, why do we need to have an Electoral College tell us how we MEANT to vote?

The Electoral College has worked wonderfully, hasn't it? They were so wise they gave us w in 2000 despite the popular vote to the contrary. Well now, their wiseness caused a preemptive war with Iraq that people never wanted, a denial of global warming for 8 years, Katrina victims to be forgotten, and a budget deficit for war that's beyond belief. The entire system needs changed.

IT IS TIME TO GIVE THE ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PEOPLE EQUALLY WITH ONE VOTE FOR ONE CITIZEN IN A NATIONAL PRIMARY AND A NATIONAL GENERAL ELECTION. SIMPLY COUNT THE PAPER BALLOTS HONESTLY AND ACCURATELY WITH THE POPULAR VOTE WINNER BEING THE PRESIDENT.

WE DON'T NEED A BETTER EXPLANATION. WHAT WE NEED IS A BETTER SYSTEM!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:26 AM on 02/14/2008
photo

I agree, but I would take it one step further. I would like to see our government changed into a parliamentary system. Then we could have more than two parties and we could have a vote of confidence when our government is going off the rails, rather than having to wait 4 years to make a correction.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:58 AM on 02/14/2008
photo

I totally agree.

One person, one vote. One national primary day in the Spring. One direct popular vote in the fall. No delegates, superedelegates, "electors", "swing states" or any of that nonsense ever again.

I would add a form of runoff voting, either a runoff system as in France and Brazil or a ranked-choice system as used in Australia and Ireland.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:08 PM on 02/14/2008

There is no way that Florida of Michigans vote should be accepted. They knew the consequences of their actions, and held an elections that are now irreparably broken.

It could never be considered fair, and to hold new elections would be immensely costly and time consuming.

It also would not be fair to the candidates who did not interact in the process, unlike senator Clinton.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:59 PM on 02/13/2008

so, what this comes down 2 is the repig primaries and caucuses r more democratic than the democratic primaries and caucuses?

one Revolution, please? hold the veiled hypocrisy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:17 PM on 02/13/2008
- Lalo I'm a Fan of Lalo permalink

it's more democratic than what they do in some ways and less in others. proportional representation is a true democratic process because it avoids coercion of minority by majority. caucus is not democratic at all, because there is no secret ballot voting but a group think.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:24 PM on 02/13/2008

On the issue of delegates, Obama's people are claiming that they've all but wrapped up the nomination because of yestday's primaries.

Its not over yet though. Before we hand this thing over to Obama, lets take an honest look at his judgment on something more than one issue. He voted to approve Cheney's 2005 Energy Bill. McCain and Clinton didn't. Why?

http://www.greenpieceblog.com/2008/02/obama-and-2005-energy-bill.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 02/13/2008
- Lalo I'm a Fan of Lalo permalink

Obama's camp is obviously spinning this. The rules are clear: you win the nomination when you reach the prescribed amount of delegates. No candidate will have that. Next steps: resolve Florida and Michigan. Then allow superdelegates to step in and give their votes to who they think will win in november.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:27 PM on 02/13/2008

Many people criticize the existence of SuperDelegates as mere party machinery. However, I think it's a necessary trade-off. Most of the republican primaries are winner-take-all, making a tie nearly impossible or at least highly improbable

Since the democrats split the delegates according to the vote, it's very possible, as we're seeing, for a near 50/50 split. In that event, it would be best to have some sort of opinion weigh in. It may be harsh, but for what it's worth I would prefer to have people like our elected officials and people highly active in politics sway the nomination in the end.

What I wish is that the SuperDelegates wouldn't be included in all the counts given by major news outlets. Their votes aren't final until the convention anyway, so they shouldn't be allowed to sway momentum just yet.

excerpted from: http://politicalmaelstrom.blogspot.com/2008/02/superdelegates-give-hillary-lead-on.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:41 PM on 02/12/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect

 

Send us tips and comments:

huffpolitics@huffingtonpost.com
GTalk/AIM: NicoPitneyIM


2007-09-27-feed.jpg FEED

HuffPost Reporters
Nico Pitney is National Editor at the Huffington Post.
Read More

Thomas B. Edsall is the Political Editor of the Huffington Post. He is also Joseph Pulitzer II and Edith Pulitzer Moore Professor at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism.
Read More

Sam Stein is the White House correspondent for the Huffington Post. Previously he worked for Newsweek Magazine, the New York Daily News and the investigative journalism group Center for Public Integrity.
Read More

Ryan Grim is the senior congressional correspondent for the Huffington Post. He is a former staff reporter with Politico.com and Washington City Paper.
Read More

Jason Linkins is editor of Huffington Post's media commentary blog Eat the Press. He is based in Washington, DC, and previously contributed to DCist and Wonkette.
Read More

Rachel Weiner is Associate Politics Editor at the Huffington Post.
Read More

Katharine Zaleski is the Senior News Editor at the Huffington Post. She is based in New York.
Read More