SuperDelegates Super Scam

College junior Jason Rae's cell phone is blowing up, not with invites to tonight's kegger from the local sorority at Marquette University in Wisconsin, but with calls from the likes of Chelsea Clinton, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Sen. John Kerry and former President Bill Clinton.

Rae is one of 796 superdelegates, or free agents, who are not required to support the choice of primary and caucus voters for the Democratic nomination. And he's only 21 and has never voted in a presidential election.

And now everyone who is anyone has him on speed dial. On the eve of the South Carolina, Rae was out to dinner with friends when he got a call around 6pm. A voice on the other end said, "Hey Jason, its Bill here." And yesterday morning he sat down for a breakfast meeting with possible two-time first daughter, Chelsea Clinton.

Not that we doubt that Rae is a devoted party activist. He was elected as DNC member of the Wisconsin state party in June of 2004, he was just 17-years-old at the time, running against and defeating the president of the state firefighter's union, who is also a state legislator. On my show last night, Rae told us he's been riding his bike to county party meetings since he was about 14-years-old, volunteered for his first campaign at 15, and made his first donation at 16.

But come on, no offense to Jason here, but this is nuts! His vote has the impact of almost 10,000 voters! So that's why I'm calling all the superdelegates to step aside and support whoever the primary and caucus voters have chosen, before this becomes a purely political battle fought behind closed doors or on the cell phone lines in college town Wisconsin.

More on Dan Abrams.

Comments

[nellie]

Dan, I agree with your about the Super Delegates. I think we're at a point where unfairness is just unacceptable. Voters nationwide should not be disenfranchised by an elite group of super delegates whose votes—for some antique reason—count more than the average citizen's.

By the same token, MI and FL should be able to vote again so that the states are not disenfranchised and voters have an opportunity to express their preferences in a context where everyone is following the same rules.

[delicado]

Dan, you have my vote and support. These super delegates should NOT be allowed to set aside what the voters have put in action. These super delegates in no way have to abide by the way their state has voted (if it was a winner take all delegates). These people who devised this system are way off base. These primaries and Caucuses are off base too. Why not have the primary on one day, all across the U.S. Do these primary planners feel that a few states have higher intellect than those in other states? Why not give all of us the chance to vote on the whole slate of candidates. Why do the chosen few get to narrow my choices or anyone elses? Same goes for the electoral college. Abolish it and give us one person - one vote to elect a president by popular vote.

[BadChristian]

The system you want would make the places where the most people live, the most powerful..­.

Democrats like having cities as a "Vote Warehouse.­" Nothing more.

This is the highest turnout I have ever seen in urban areas... but the DLC wants to keeps the cities from scaring the suburbs into voting Republican, like they did in the eighties.

[WIDESTANCE]

after 8 years of voter disenfranchisement and suffering at the hands of a small group of republican neocons who are intent on the destruction of the (once)great American middle class, i find it horribly ironic and indefensible that the Clinton machine is now attempting to do exactly the same thing all over again

clinton agreed to the florida/ michigan delegate deal along with everybody else, but now that it looks like she's gonna need them, she's working hard to get them back in

if this is any indication of the kind of behaviour we can look forward to from day one and for the next 4 years, i say

NO THANK YOU, HILLARY, I PREFER TO HAVE A PRESIDENT WITH SOME CHARACTER, HONESTY AND INTEGRITY

[LeoMarvin]

What would "the majority" mean if one wins the regular delegates, the other the popular vote?

[nypoet22]

because caucuses and primaries have such different turnout relative to overall population, i don't think there really is any meaningful overall popular vote. between states of roughly the same size, there will be EIGHT TIMES as many total votes in primary states as in caucus states. winning the regular delegates may not be completely fair, but at least it represents proportional popular vote for each state. although i support obama and voted for him, in some ways i really hope clinton wins the majority of regular delegates. if she doesn't and wins the primary anyway, i think it would demoralize so much of the party that the general election would be lost.

[LeoMarvin]

Good point on the popular vote anomaly. I asked because although I'm also an Obama supporter, I would sympathize with the blowback from Hillary people if Barack wins the delegate count and loses the popular vote (very possible, maybe even likely) and the supers go his way. I don't exactly share your hope that this mess gets sorted out by a Clinton victory, but I am concerned about all the plausible results that give the tantrum and bomb throwers in both camps a pretext for sabotaging the election.

[Aanya]

It's ironic you put a posting here at Huffpo, Dan, just after I've sworn off Hillary for life, due to her strong arming of David Shuster. I won't support any one for President who would attack a newsman for a "word". The super delegates will hopefully all support Obama, and give Hillary the opportunity to take her little daughter back to New York, and protect her from the big bad world. Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough are offensive on a daily basis to us, the members of the Democratic Party. We've had Bush/Cheney for the past 7 hears punishing anyone who offended them. We don't need anymore of that. We need a Predident who will defend the Constitution and freedom of speech at all costs. I believe now that Hillary is not that person. She needs to contact David Shuster and make this right. Until David Shuster returns to the Air, Hillary has Bush/Cheney'd him. Much like what happened to Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson. Nope, we don't need more presidents like that! As far as the super delegates go, if Hillary was the fine upstanding politician, we are lead to believe she is, the super delegate issue would be settled simply. All votes by all voters go to the majority. Period!!!!!!!!! Hum! I wonder how she'll come down on that issue?

[Openeyes]

Well said. We already have enough DINOs like Pelosi and Reid playing dead any time there's the remotest chance to protect the constitution. We don't need a President who does the same.

[ookla]

Actually Dan well said.

I find it humorous (and not in a good way) that we as Democrats complained bitterly after losing to W while winning the popular vote and yet we seem, as a party, to have a similar potential situation brewing here....

And in terms of your opinion, it should be more than welcome here - this isn't MSNBC, it's the Huffington post. Just because you are a journalist doesn't mean that you somehow don't have a personal opinion...

Thanks.

[kickbass]

The way things are trending, Obama will be the nominee. All of the hand-wringing and idiotic statements from Rhodes and Brazile are adding to intra-Democratic Party tensions, for absolutely no reason. Super delegates should be eliminated, but at this point in time, there is nothing that indicates that super delegates will "go against the will of the voters."

Voting for McCain is really dumb idea. Period.

[InformedMisery]

When you say you want the superdelegates to side with the voters, are you including the voters in Michigan and Florida?

[SaskiaStars]

You mean half of the voters in Michigan don't you? Do you really think Hillary "won" that state when her name was the only one on the ballot?? Half of the voters voted for "un committed".

[ICUP]

If the Florida and Michigan delegates are allowed to participate, then what's to stop other states from jumping the 2/5/12 start date? No real punishment will have be meted out to the two states that violated party rules. I can foresee several states engaging in a game of chicken with the DNC on this issue. Dean needs to show some guts and refuse to seat both states' delgations come what may.

[detwob]

it is simply a lie for obamicans to keep repeating that the only name on the michigan ballot was clinton.

there were four names on the ballot.

but truth is irrelevant when you offer empty charismatic hope

[clevelandchick]

It is not fair to the candidate that was not on the ballot to seat the delegates of that state - a contest where voters were told their vote wouldn't count.

Are you telling me that folks in MI who support Obama went to the polls when he wasn't even on the ballot? Bull. What about their opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice?

I'm all for holding new primaries or caucuses in both FLA and MI. And the Democratic leadership in both those states should be canned.

[Nutcase]

I am not in favor of the concept of super delegates but I see some hypocrisy.

When speaking of FL and MI possibly being seated and having their votes counted, how many people screamed that everyone knew the rules and agreed to play by them? Well, super delegates are a part of the rules of the game. I don't see that any candidate would have a right to complain if the super delegates changed the outcome.

Actually, I'm hoping that the super delegates hold off and a stalemate develops, permitting the super delegates to lead the way for an Edwards nomination. It's a dream but better than the nightmare of either Clinton or Obama.

cognito ergo populistae

[clevelandchick]

It is not fair to seat those delegates when one of the candidates wasn't on the ballot. If I was a native of either state and my candidate wasn't on the ballot, I would not have gone out to vote that day.

There is no 'proof' that anyone won those states because only one of the contenders was on the ballot and they did not allow for write-ins either.

So no, it's really not hypocrtical at all.

[Nutcase]

Would you say that it was okay for Obama to do a fundraiser and play ads in Florida? Or, are you a hypocrite?

cognito ergo populistae

[nellie]

Edwards? That is dreaming.

[Economike]

It's an undemocratic rule and it needs to be heaved overboard.

[JackW]

Dan, I agree with your comments to some degree, however, how about you concentrate on getting Florida and Michigan delegates approved without having another caucus or primary in those states. The Democrats voted, sand to have another election just means the powers that be want Obama to win and forget about fairness. Once that's done, kill the superdelegates and in case of a tie, have Howard Dean, as the head of the DNC cast the deciding vote.

[Nutcase]

Also, Obama had a fundraiser in Florida and ran ads there.

cognito ergo populistae

[ICUP]

No one was on the Michigan ballot except HRC. How can that be a valid result? If the Michigan delegates are seated, then Dean and the DNC are just as anti-democratic as Putin and his ilk.

[Pammy1151]

Sorry Nutcase I live in Florida and am a supporter and "he did NOT" have a fundraiser here or I woukd have been here. Yes, he did run an ad but do did she. She came down the night of the election to suck up. The exit polls showed that if there had not been early voting he would have been in much better shape here. Please stop spreading rumors.

[clevelandchick]

You cannot approve the MI delegates when one of the candidates wasn't on the ballot. There is no proof that Hillary would have won that state if Obama had been on that ballot along with her. How many voters that would have supported Obama stayed home, especially when they were told that this vote wasn't going to count anyway?

People rail on how the MI/FLA voters are being disenfranc­hised...we­ll how many more voters will be disenfranchised if you seat those delegates? All the folks who would have voted but their candidate wasn't on the ballot? What about them?

[Nutcase]

Are you saying more would be disenfranchised by counting those who voted than by not counting them? Numbers please. With the governor, unions and others backing her and polls showing her leading, you seem to have a disdain for facts.

cognito ergo populistae

[grendl]

I have a suggestion for Barack Obama.

In a recent interview he voiced his mistrust of the system of super delegates.

Well, being one himself, here's my suggestion. Rescind your super delegate status. Turn in your cape and cowl, and demand to be demoted to simply delegate status.

People want to see actions not words from Mr. Obama, and if he is truly sincere in his cries for change, this would seem an opportune issue to show as an example his desire.

There's nothing fair or democratic about super delegates. Those who argue its been around for twenty years as some sort of justification for its existence, and say its too late to change it now, while right, are buying into the notion that things will never change.

Mr. Obama, put your money where your mouth is. Rescind your super delegate status, as a symbolic gesture. Or are you afraid to alienate those who might derail your presideential bid.

You talk of courage and hope, here's a chance to put your money where your mouth is, or was when you gave that interview.

[clevelandchick]

How come you don't ask Hillary to do the same? Because you know she wouldn't. Just like she promised to take her name off the MI or FLA ballots and now cries 'no fair' when their votes don't count.

[grendl]

Because I believe Barack when he talks about the need for change, and because he said in an interview he disagreed with the super delegate system, or the inherent fallibility of such a system.

I want him to make the gesture, because I don't think she would in a million years jeopardize her standing with super delegates. She's to entrenched, he isn't.

Or maybe he is. It's undemocratic, and one of Barack's number one criticisms is that he's all rhetoric no action. What better way to show he's serious about change than rescinding super delegate status.

A twenty one year old has more power than hundreds, or thousands of lifetime voters to influence a national election. That's a travesty.

We say we want to export democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan and other nations, yet we don't practice it here. It's damaged goods, faulty product like the lead painted toys we get from China.

I've seen no credible argument supporting the idea of super delegates. All I've seen is the rich and powerful establishment claiming some sort of entitlement to nullifying my vote.

[Nutcase]

She could not have promised such a thing as once the names were on the ballots (for early voters) they coundn't be removed. Stop making up excuses.

cognito ergo populistae

[LeoMarvin]

This is nonsense. John Edwards doesn't have to take a vow of poverty to fight against the inordinate control of the super-rich. Warren Buffet doesn't have to donate money to the IRS to make the point that he should be paying more taxes. And Barack Obama doesn't have to offer unilateral concessions against his political interest to make a point of principle about the system within which he has the same single unit of un-democratic influence Hillary does.

[divabunny]

better yet... since hillary won mass., he should reject the SD votes from kery and kennedy and give those votes to her. c'mon barry... put your money where your mouth is!

[DoninJoisey]

Sure, if Bill will rescind also.

[Jaybot]

Ya know what the Democrats need this year? A replay of the '68 convention. If the super delegates determine the nominee - it's what they deserve.I doubt it will happen though, today's Democrats are far too listless to give a shit.

[DoninJoisey]

You haven't been hearing about the record turnouts in primaries if you say that. I'm 61, and I never voted in a primary before. I went and decalred myself democrat from uncommitted, and said NO to a third Clinton term.

[honeybee49]

1968 redux? No. Obama 08 = McGovern 72.

[Advocate123]

I agree completely Dan. Not only are the Super Delegates a terrible system, most people do not form their political beliefs completely until they are well outside of college. (I was a die hard liberal when I was in Undergrad, and now am a staunch Conservative/ Libertarian).

This is not to say that young conservatives are smarter than liberals, but a major requirement of forming life-long political beliefs is understanding both side's arguments as best as possible and living in the real world.

Young college people just don't meet that requirement and is specifically why, in my opinion, that both parties try to court these impressionable groups.

One kid who just was given the right to drink should not have his vote count more than anyone else. He should have the right to vote, but certainly not to destroy the votes of others.

[BadChristian]

C'mon Dan.
If the suburbs were to count urban voters equally, do you think urban areas would have such crappy infrastructure? I think they'd probably be alot more sympathetic to the ninth Ward in NO. If it were up to the masses in urban America, would they say, "Hey we could use fewer schools and teachers in the city... OH and build us some much bigger prisons for our kids when those schools fail them?"
They've been able to con urbanites since this scam was invented.
Urban liberals have to be culled from the Democratic Party before they can be accepted to the breast of K-Street. God knows that the corporations have gone to war against us. If urban centers come out in numbers NEVER seen before, there has to be a way to negate them.

[AnninCA]

Again, it's disreputable to try to call this a Democratic primary with this type of rhetoric.

Just go be Independents.

Say the truth. Screw the Democrats!