Clinton Supporter Rangel: "The People" Will Select Nominee, Not Superdelegates

Newsday:

Harlem Rep. Charles Rangel - one of Hillary Clinton's most stalwart African-American defenders - is apparently questioning her reliance on unelected superdelegates to stay competitive with Barack Obama, saying they may not reflect the "will" of Democratic voters.

"It's the people [who are] going to govern who selects our next candidate and not superdelegates," Rangel said last night at a dinner for the New York State Association of Black and Puerto Rican Legislators conference in Albany.

Read the whole story: Newsday

Comments

[2liveNdie]

09:52 AM on 02/19/2008

Why would the NAACP back Hillary and her effort to break rules and somehow reward her with delegates from Mi and Fl? If Obama was to win the Presidency, that might just put them the NAACP out of business. I mean their whole fight is for the advancement of colored people right? With an African American if the highest office in the country how could they continue to argue that is nation is as divided as their cause would suggest? I admit racism wouldn't end with Obama as President, but it sure would shut up some of those like the NAACP who thrive on a divided country!

[vsign]

08:08 AM on 02/19/2008

Words are important! Obama is so weak, his followers have to carry him. He's their savior, so they don't mind.

Well - The Democratic Party can't afford "to carry" Obama. He can never beat McCain, not even as a democrat. We've got to drop him FAST!

Stand on your own feet Obama. Speak your own words.

[veracal]

09:05 AM on 02/19/2008

How many threads are you going to post this on? Please stop.

[2liveNdie]

09:59 AM on 02/19/2008

People who post these messages somehow think everyone who reads them will be persuaded to change their minds on the candidate they like ARE brainwashed just as the Clinton's would like them to be. You should have more substance in your message and open your mind to greater purpose.

[Silpat]

01:31 AM on 02/19/2008

Funny, no one is asking Hillary why she didn't object to the "disenfranchisement" of FL and MI immediately after the DNC's decision was made or at least prior to their primary/caucus.

Why weren't the voters in FL and MI of importance to Hillary prior to their primary/caucus taking place? Interesting isn't it?

[AnninCA]

08:24 AM on 02/19/2008

Obama also advised supporters in Florida that he would fight to seat them. This is in an interview he gave after a fundraiser.

If he were even close in votes there, I'm sure he'd have no objection.

And he still may change his tune on that.

[TurnThePageGA]

10:12 AM on 02/19/2008

Your sure is a speculation and that's all because you don't know.

[MRb1000]

01:29 AM on 02/19/2008

I think they should just turn there back on Hillary Clinton for trying to destroy the party. Bill and Hillary Clinton should be sanction and no longer have a say in party business. Two people can not hold a whole party down. If this is true we are all domed as a country. We do not have kings and queens in America.

The Clinton represent what America do not need!

Liars

[AnninCA]

08:29 AM on 02/19/2008

This is just BS. She hasn't been the one to call up Super Delegates and play the race card and make people uncomfortable as heck. He has!

You want to see whose twisting arms? It's Obama. And the tactics aren't pretty, either.

I realize he said she can't win by his math. But I've read plenty of analysts who disagree with his math.

She should absolutely not abandon the campaign. Remember, her supporters have a stake in her fighting this out.

If she loses as she did in the Potomic in the upcoming primaries, then OK. I would be willing for her to step aside.

But not just because you're wanting him to win.

You see, I agree with Hillary on one important issue. This isn't a game. I truly believe her direction is what the country desperately needs. We have so much rebuilding to do. I don't see Obama as anyone who can roll up his sleeves and deliver. He'll be one sound-bite after another type of president, in my opinion.

My position is clear. I don't think we can afford him.

So she said she would get up every day and fight. She must prove that now by fighting in this primary.

And she must not worry if she looks "petty" or "disagreeable" to some people. She must show us that she meant it and that she will do everything she can to make this happen.

[TurnThePageGA]

10:14 AM on 02/19/2008

Can you name the superdelegate that Obama called and played the race card with?............................................................................................................................................... I didn't think so.

[bitabingbitabangbitaboom]

01:27 AM on 02/19/2008

Charlie got Pussy Whipped by his wife.

[Plowboy]

12:26 AM on 02/19/2008

Typical Hillary: when asked why hers was THE ONLY NAME on the Michigan ballot, she said,"Oh, what's the difference? Those votes won't count anyway." Well that was the agreement. But when she beat Nobody, she started shrilly crying for her delegates.
And in Florida, she didn't campaign? That was the agreement BUT she was there for three big fund raisers. Attention! That is campaigning. And then she was there for the Shrill Hill call for her delegates!
I can see why some people dislike her. She cheats.
And as for Rangell, he can speak for himself, but he does not speak for the NAACP, and when it is pretended that he does, that is an abuse of the office, and of the truth.
But what else -- Hillary Clinton is losing. We should expect such. In fact, she's in the game, so we should expect it.

[Plowboy]

12:31 AM on 02/19/2008

Many working people won't bother to vote in meaningless contests. Michigan was a case of that. But when the idiots in the Democratic Party set this mess up, one could smell the trouble it would cause, especially with Hillary in the act!

[wyorange]

01:12 AM on 02/19/2008

I think most thinking people would thought like what the heck are these "idiots" in the democratic party doing disenfranchizing voters, not thinking well this will give Hillary a chance to to play with these delegates.

[horacekent]

08:36 PM on 02/18/2008

***** Clinton to Voters: "DROP DEAD!"

Hello - I'm Horace Kent,.... & I approve this Article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/clinton-to-voters-drop-_b_87283.html

Great Luck!
~HK

[AnninCA]

06:54 PM on 02/18/2008

The other issue which hasn't really been discussed a lot is that the Registered Democrats are clearly voting in favor of Clinton.

So there is a problem, Houston.

Super Delegates are supposed to be somewhat objective, etc., and think this through.

We'll see.

You could just see a large share of Registered Democrats switch to being Registered Republicans and leave the Democrats to the Obamamaniacs.

That may be where this is headed.

[Jazz42]

07:11 PM on 02/18/2008

How much do you get paid for Trolling post?
(AnninCA)

[AnninCA]

08:01 PM on 02/18/2008

Name-callers really don't bother me much. Says alot about the poster. Very little about me.

[kevenseven]

07:27 PM on 02/18/2008

If you are suggesting that it is a bad thing that Obama draws independents more strongly than does HRC, I'm afraid I do not follow you.

Or are you saying that registered Dems will not vote for Obama in the General? Why would that be?

As for your deranged fantasy of Dems abandoning the party for the Thugs if Obama prevails, I suggest you go to your shrink and discuss your medications.

[AnninCA]

08:07 PM on 02/18/2008

I thought I said what I meant. Independents may end up controlling this primary. Looks like it, anyway. That means.....the make-up and the real focus of the party will have changed.

That won't necessarily work for certain constinuencies who clearly voted for Hillary.

And that's 6 out of 10 voters even in the Potomac "blow-out."

So the question then is who are you trading off for these Independents?

I would guess....the older Democrats. And we're the ones who vote more consistently.

But his health care program is not helpful to that group at all.

The surge is getting some fairly good news right now.

So, yeah.....I'm thinking he'll lose a chunk of the hard-core party members.

In return, he gets these Independents.

But I'm not sure that's necessarily a great long-term strategy for the party.

I know it's horrifying to think about, but I don't see him promoting the party at all, anyway.

He's definitely not loyal to it. Look at Michelle's comments. Wild!!

So I think this may be the end of the Democrats as we know it.

[AnninCA]

08:10 PM on 02/18/2008

Oh, I also think he'll lose the Southwest. They went Republican before. I think that he'll not pull them in.

[Jaybot]

06:35 PM on 02/18/2008

Yeah, I'm going to take the word of Charles "Seal it and catch hell" Rangel.

[kevenseven]

06:14 PM on 02/18/2008

nascarliberal writes:

"The rule was just arbitrarily thrown out there by Howard Dean! It isn't in the Constitution. If anything the Constitution says residents in one state can not be favored over residents of another state. So, I'd say little potentate-Dean broke Constitutional law by saying Florida and Michigan votes don't count. See ya in court Howie!"

No. And No.

Dean was one of a group of duely authorized people in the leadership of the DNC who properly set the rules of the '08 election. The methods and rules of the party in the process of choosing its nominee is entirely the party's to set.

There is nothing in the Constitution, besides the 14th amendment, that pertains in anyway to how the party runs the election. The party could decide to pick a name from a hat. Perfectly legal.

The party has the power to set the schedule. MI and FL have six months until the convention. There is no reason that they could not have a slate of delegates chosen within the sanctioned calendar and seated.

What is the problem?

[kevenseven]

06:22 PM on 02/18/2008

The party could declare that only caucuses would be conducted, and only those who can prove that they voted in the last presidential (over age 22) and have given 100 hours service to the party in the previous year will be permitted into the caucus.

There is not one word in the constitution that contradicts that set of rules.

You and I have no RIGHT to decide who the nominee of the party will be.

[AnninCA]

06:07 PM on 02/18/2008

Sounds like he was reasonable and then the race boys got ahold of him and did some arm-twisting.

Obama.....the candidate of change. :)

It's pretty darn obvious to me, anyway, the unfair tactics that are being used.

[AdLib]

06:12 PM on 02/18/2008

Yep, people who support democracy instead of party officials overriding the majority's vote are pretty corrupt.

[nihilon x]

07:03 PM on 02/18/2008

Kind of like Hillary and NOW, right?

As someone who supports Hillary based -- at least somewhat -- on her gender, you have no right to criticize others for doing the same with regards to "race".

[AnninCA]

07:14 PM on 02/18/2008

BS. I'm a Hillary supporter on MUCH, MUCH more than her race.

I respect the right of anyone to pull the lever for any reason.

Personally, the race voters aren't ever going to win my *Great American Civic Responsibility* award.

But they can vote accord to the length of someone nose or the way someone talks.

As for Now? Now hasn't been making calls to super-delegates regarding gender. I'm absolutely SURE that Hillary Clinton would never resort to that tactic.

Obama sure will though.

Gets caught at it too.

But that doesn't strike this Obamamania group as being hypocritical while he yaps about how SuperDelegates aren't democratic.

Outspent her too trying to buy them.

But that doesn't bother anyone while he sends around misinformation about her being "Big Money".

Believe me I've gotten it.

It really doesn't matter to Obamamanics that he's just another dirty politician. Just so long as he wins.

That is most definitely become quite clear to everyone.

[Susan1968]

05:54 PM on 02/18/2008

Obama is wrong about the role of Super Delegates and he's misinforming his minions.

AnninCA said it best below, so I am quoting here here:

"... Super Delegates are independent and were given this power precisely to make sure that the Party is protected for Independents swooping in and taking over.

They are supposed to be independent and vote their conscience based on what is best for the party.

Obama's chanting masses who call this unAmerican, etc., are, in fact, behaving exactly like Third Party people the role was designed to protect us from.

He has deliberately twisted the definition of the role in order to undermine her firm support from Super Delegates. ... But make no mistake. He's misinforming people daily on this role of Superdelegates."

[AdLib]

06:08 PM on 02/18/2008

You are mindlessly regurgitating falsehoods. Try doing something called "research" before swearing your allegiance to the propaganda you want to believe.

To reiterate those inconvenient facts I listed in response to AnninCa's eroneous post which you have reposted:

Please cite one instance when Super Delegates overturned the majority vote.

(silence)

Since that's never happened, are you contending that every Democratic primary since the creation of Super Delegates has broken the rules since they have always voted for the candidate with the most delegates and votes?

BTW, I do agree with you that the idea behind the Super Delegates is as a safeguard, but not for the false reason you constructed. If you did just a little research, you would find it has nothing to do with "independents swooping in and taking over".

It was instituted after the 1980 election when, under the old delegate structure Carter and Kennedy were deadlocked and fighting at the convention and the party had no mechanism to settle it.

This does not as yet appear to be the case this year, both camps have concurred that Obama will likely win the most states, popular votes and delegates. In such a case, there will be no need to press the emergency button and overrule the majority vote.

[AnninCA]

06:51 PM on 02/18/2008

Wrong:

The only time superdelegates have played a pivotal role was in 1984, when support from party insiders helped Walter Mondale fend off a challenge by insurgent Gary Hart.

[vsign]

05:41 PM on 02/18/2008

The super delegates need to set something right for working people who did not get a chance for their vote to count in a primary (the caucases were simply overrun by Obama voters.) If the Democratic Party is going to keep the working class members, the super delegates need to help us. Out of the two candidates left standing, Hillary represents the working class. I'm working class and I do know we like Hillary. I feel like we're getting bullied.

Please do it to keep the party together and win in November.

[AnninCA]

08:17 AM on 02/19/2008

The world is being overrun by these zealots! LOL* Nevermind the caucuses.

It's like the moonies were let out.

Apparently, workplaces are innundated now with incredible pressure from Obamamaniacs. They had a radio call-in show yesterday about who was annoyed...it was hilarious! The stories were appalling, except that on the blogs, I sure see it. So I could imagine.

One woman on here yesterday bragged that her elderly mother quietly said she'd really like to vote for a woman in her lifetime, but her kids screamed at her so much and told her they wouldn't talk to her again that she acquiesced.

Now, people? You can think some of call it Obamamania just to be mean. But that type of appalling behavior is earning the label.

[CheshireCat2]

05:07 PM on 02/18/2008

Uh, Oh! How do you spell trouble in 2008? O-B-A-M-A

[bitabingbitabangbitaboom]

01:27 AM on 02/19/2008

Barak Obama is Half White not Black!

[lungfish]

04:22 PM on 02/18/2008

Not a dem that I am particularly proud of....

[nacilbuper]

05:05 PM on 02/18/2008

not at all. he's hedging his bet. wants to make sure he has an out if he has to vote against hillary to save his political hide.

rangel is nothing more than a cheap, money chasing, machine politician who realizes his days in the saddle are numbered.

i live in his district and have been tiring of his stench for years.

the racist crap he pulled when he ran for re-election against adam clayton powell III (is he black enough?) was the turning point for me with rangel.

[nihilon x]

07:24 PM on 02/18/2008

He lost me when he tried to re-instate the draft for the Iraq War.