Democratic Party May Dump Superdelegates

Seems like only yesterday that the entire nation was thrilling to the sturm und drang of the Democratic Party presidential primary process. Remember that nonsense? Michigan and Florida had their delegates denied! Texas had some three-headed demon-cow thingy called a primacaucus, which no one understood. Delegates were awarded proportionally, based upon voting numbers, a fact which escaped sage-genius and microtrending bridge troll Mark Penn. And somehow, the whole mess culminated in some horrible dust-up at a DNC meeting in Woodley Park, where the only thing everyone could agree on was that Sam Stein needed to be yelled at, repeatedly, while eating a sandwich.

It's impossible to look back on those halcyon days and not wish that they would soon come again, especially that sandwich, because it looked delicious. Well, those monsters at the DNC are aiming to wreck a large part of what made last year's presidential primaries so downright magical. From The Note:

One year after the country got an in-depth lesson on "superdelegates," the Democratic Party may consider doing away with them in the future.

Nooo! Surely this can't be happening! If only because superdelegacy is basically a stupid perk of being a top dog in the Democratic party hierarchy, an honorary title that allows the "some" to feel more important than the "many." Repealing a cliquish privilege? In Washington, DC? Whoever heard of such a thing? There had better be a good reason!

Touching on what may prove to be one of the more contentious issues considered by the DNC, one presenter, Democratic Party activist and Harvard University lecturer and former superdelegate Elaine Kamarck, suggested that it may be time to completely eliminate superdelegates since most of those party leaders clearly determined their role in 2008 to be one of ratifying the decision made by voters in primaries and caucuses.

"We can probably let go of the superdelegates," said Kamarck.

"Their deliberative role," she added, "has in fact been supplanted by a very very public process."

Ahh. I get it. Being a superdelegate was all fun and games until there actually came a time when it suddenly mattered. Is a perk really a perk if it comes with responsibility? Surely not. And shucking responsibility? Well, that's even more Classic Washington than accruing pointless and inane honorifics!

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[AnnfromCA]

I remember when so many Dems left the party back when. I stuck firm. Straight ticket. I was so convinced.

This election blew that apart for me. I wouldn't vote straight Dem again if you held a gun to my head.

I'm not going to vote for D. Feinstein. I've voted for her for YEARS. This year? She wants EFCA, which I abhor, and she's against the public plan in healthcare, which I'm for?

She does not represent me. I don't care what her label is.

She is NOT MY representative.


Out, out! Spot.

[CitizenJ]

If you're waiting for someone who holds your view on every issue, you will be waiting for a while.

[AnnfromCA]

I can tell from Diane's positions, it's not her.

Out, out, spot!

[oceanofconsciousness]

Yes. Send a message. I also will not be voting for her as well.

[whiskeytangofoxtrot451]

Good. They're such a stupid and elitist idea.

Next up: Get rid of caucuses and Iowa's ridiculous "first in the nation" status. Let's have regional primaries so we don't have to spend 8 months crisscrossing the nation randomly.

[AnnfromCA]

AMEN!

[ibsteve2u]

Why? Are ya'll afraid that a carefully packaged campaign might fall apart, if the American people - and the press - are given too long to scrutinize it?

Gee....has that ever happened before?

lolllll...­.

[friscosf]

Remember when Hillary was 'Inevitable' ???
Iowa took care of theat

Without the Iowa Caucus, the candidates with the insider support and BIG BUCKS WINS !!

No Thanks, Iowa is Direct Democracy


THANK YOU, IOWA from a San Franciscan !!!

[frantaylor]

Iowa is NOT "direct democracy"

It is "democracy for the few who have the free time to spend hours on it".

Those who do not have the means to drive to a caucus are left out in the cold.

[whiskeytangofoxtrot451]

Iowa didn't "take care" of Hillary. Remember, she turned around and won New Hampshire. All Iowa did was remind her that she was in a race, not a coronation. It took several more losses to "take care" of her. And it was months after she had no chance to catch up for her to finally realize it and drop out.

Iowa isn't direct democracy. It's democracy of those who can afford to take an entire day off.

[AnnfromCA]

Caucuses should also be eliminated. If the Dem party doesn't do away with them, then it's going to end up in the Courts.

They are undemocratic.

That was proven.

[friscosf]

The Iowa Caucus is INVALUABLE
It allows candidates without Bib BUCKS (read lobbyist contributions) and the support of insiders to compete

Remember when Hillary was 'Inevitable' ?

The Iowa caucus took care of THAT NONESENSE

Keep Caucuses !!

Lose the Super Delegates

GOBAMA !!!

[AnnfromCA]

Oh lets look at the real facts.

Both O and others abused the laws, ran ads, etc.

That's Democratic values, right?

Wrong.

We all know.

And I exit.

You can continue to support this nonsense.

Not me.

[AnnfromCA]

Superdelegates are the vestiges of lobby power.

I'm over it.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Translation: Democratic poo-bahs have no spine to carry out the popularity-bucking concept of SuperD's.

[AnnfromCA]

They either revise the system, or I guarantee you, I'll never clock in as a Democrat again in my entire life.

Unfortunately, it's too late. I've tasted the freedom of Independence, and I like it.

I now find I'm opposed to my senator, although she's been in power for years. I realized this year, she doesn't represent me at all.

The Democrats lost me.

[barackobama4prez]

It's okay. The Republicans lost most of their moderates so we're even.

[AnnfromCA]

I think more of us are INDEPENDENT as the result of both sides.

I really must say. I like it.

[DinSea]

86 the superdelegates, then the archaic voting machines! Hanging chads, re-counts ... has even one election gone smoothly? We need an accurate system that doesn't drag on for months months .. ahem ... Coleman/Franken?

[windup]

Let's do away with the electoral college. Remember the 2000 election when everyone was talking about that? In fact, let's get rid of a two-party system. Let's have a run-off presidential election, so a 3rd party actually has a fighting chance. These 2 parties are proving that they don't represent the majority of Americans.

[frantaylor]

There are many Constitutional brick walls between here and there, and there's just no way they are going to come down.

I think tilting at windmills would be more successful.

[Mnemanth]

Oh? And where in the Constitution does it state We, the People, have a choice ONLY between Corporate Party #1, and Corporate Party #2?
We're not being represented by these white collar gangs, and I believe the majority of Americans would say the same. We've just allowed ourselves to believe this is just the way it is, and can't be changed.

[mredder4]

Amen.

1. The superdelegate process broke just when it was most needed. Too many representatives pledged (ahead of the convention, no less) to vote for Obama against the will of the people in their states. This skewed the votes of other superdelegates and also ultimately poisoned the whole process. How any elected official justified voting for a candidate other than the one that the majority of their constituents picked in a primary is beyond me, but there should be no more of it.

2. It was a dumb idea anyway. Direct primary elections are the only way to have a fair, democratic process. Please be made aware of my obvious omission of caucuses from this description. Caucuses are the same as superdelegates: undemocratic. I don't care how grand your political "tradition" is, if it was designed when carts were powered by actual horses rather than estimated horsepower, it's time to retire it.

[GeorgeP922]

Hello Puma tr oll, welcome back, we missed you guys!
Let me quote:
". Too many representatives pledged (ahead of the convention, no less) to vote for Obama against the will of the people in their states."

Ironically Hillary had pledged Super Delegates like DLC V.Chairmen Governor Martin O Malley of Maryland.
His state voted for Obama 67%, on of the top 3, and the night that locked in pledged delegates for Obama.
You had no problem with O'Malley keeping his Super Delegate pledge for her until the end?

Man the PUMAs had a year to figure out this, but they still fail

[AnnfromCA]

I'm not interested in either party. I'm interested in the issues today.

I couldn't care less if Dems or Repubs do this or that.

It's over.

[NoSillyName]

"Superdelegates". Ridiculous idea.

[jsgaetano]

Maybe we can just pay them more. That's what the GOP would do.

[GeorgeP922]

The Super Delegate system is a smart one.

It only came into question when Hillary supporters were more than willing to use and abuse the system in any way possible.

The idea is the Supers are to be checks on the Pledged.

Both Delegates can vote how they wish (for the scenario that lets say the candidate commits some serious crime after the vote)
The Pledged Delegate should vote according to their district, and the Super should back that up.

What we got though were some Super Delegates, like say Governor O'Malley of Maryland, who was bought and paid for by the Clintons and he was vice chair of the DLC held back his endorsement and Super Delegate vote for Obama till the bitter end of the primary.

Ironically, Maryland voted for Obama 67%, silently sealing his lead from there out.
And now, O'Malley has lost all credentials with Maryland Democrats.

Our system is fine the way it is, Superdelegates only hurt the renegade conservative and corporatists in our party who are more than willing to rehire Mark Penn and do the same thing over.

Also, be sure that THIRD WAY, Mark Penn's still active think tank in DC will be supporting this.

[frantaylor]

Why not just skip the voting process entirely and proceed directly to monarchy?

Why do you want to fix an over-complex system by adding more complexity to it?

Somewhere along the line the entire concept of "representation" is just getting thrown out the window.

[GeorgeP922]

You got me opposite, I love our system.

I totally believe in the idea of representative government.

My point is special interest groups like the DLC and Third Way lost ALOT of power this election, the party that used to be so status quo, 10K$ dinner fundraisers, boring rallies and boring conventions got shook to it's core.
They will fight out of revenge to change the party, and to what end?

Our system worked, we elected a candidate that won by a landslide and in Demographics that no other President from our party ever got.

You know that NO Democratic President has ever won the majority of white males, until Obama!
I could go on and on........­..

[wavelength5]

It's about time this elitist process and practice was terminated. I feel the same way about the Electoral College.

[xansam]

100 per cent agree

[CaliforniaLove]

Then the smaller states (population-wise) would become even further marginalized.

[deepintheheartoftejas]

Is that a bad thing? They already get over-represented in the house by a moderate amount, and in the senate by a huge amount.

[whiskeytangofoxtrot451]

Yeah, because the Electoral College already gives Wyoming and Delaware so much attention.

Oh wait, those states are virtually ignored in the general election because they always go to the same parties (D for Delawar, R for Wyoming).

[GeorgeP922]

Son, you need to go to school.

If you don't understand the value of Representative Democracy you obviously don't understand politics.

According to your logic we should do away with regular delegates?

[LeftRight]

I find this one rather amusing, since the superdelegates were the DIRECT result of the 1968 campaign, when it got so messy allowing all those "democratic" principles to stand and allowing the *GASP* people to make their decision. Now, because of all the heat that they took this time around, they want to get rid of the system??????

I personally don't care (though I don't really LIKE the superdelegate idea, I can understand it) but it IS funny!!!

[GeorgeP922]

This is the DLC flexing their muscles again.

Notice how the DNC as a group is dead in the water?
And now they are conceding 30+ years of processes for an invisible minority.

If we give up Super Delegates that is us conceding we have no faith in our party members.

[AnnfromCA]

The DLC is dead.

Trust me.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Moi aussie.

[swan1]

About time!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!