Are the Superdelegates Rats? Rats on a Ship?

There has been such a hue and cry about the superdelegates subverting the democratic process. There are claims that these party leaders and elected officials are beholden to the Clintons. I argued virtually with Ari Emanuel a couple of days ago (the brother of a superdelegate as I am the son of one) about the fear that these congressmen, senators, governors, and DNC members would subvert the will of the people. "Nothing to fear" was my point.

Well, here's a little more to that story. The Associated Press last night made the strong case that, despite the most fervent wishes of those who love a conspiracy, most of the superdelegates are beholden to no one ... maybe even especially "unbeholden" to the Clintons.

Let's start with superdelegate and Clinton '92 campaign manager David Wilhelm who will today endorse .... drum roll ... Senator Barack Obama. But there's more, per the AP story "Chickens Come Home to Roost" ...

"For years, Bill and Hillary Clinton treated the Democratic National Committee and party activists as extensions of their White House ambitions, pawns in a game of success and survival. She may pay a high price for their selfishness soon. Top Democrats, including some inside Hillary Clinton's campaign, say many party leaders -- the so-called superdelegates -- won't hesitate to ditch the former New York senator for Barack Obama if her political problems persist. Their loyalty to the first couple is built on shaky ground ... [The superdelegates] are not all super fans of the Clintons."

Sometimes, paranoia doesn't mean they are actually out to get you.

Comments

[BufoAmericanus]

Sometimes, people behave better when they know people are watching.
I think Dean made a shot across the Bow, and I hope there doesn't need to be a follow up.

[JohnFromCensornati]

The Dims need to abolish the super delegates before the next election.
Sorry Donnie, but we don't trust them.
They had better go with the popular vote in this election.
Otherwise, the Dims can expect to be as unpopular as the GOP.
Clinton or Obama is OK, but it should not be an inside job.

[grendl]

You don't seem to get it. The entire system allowing for the existence of super delegates is fundamentally un-democratic, unfair and flawed. When one American citizen's vote can nullify another, or the votes of many, that's unjust.

I don't care how much you love or trust your father, that 21 year old Little Lord Fauntleroy super delegate with the golden locks should not have more say in who becomes this nation's president than I do.

You seem to dismiss the scenario wherein superdelegates defy the will of the electorate as unlikely, but that's just not good enough. The fact that it's a possibility underscores the failing of the system.

It's undemocratic, elitist bullshit, and those who came up with the idea of superdelegates are no friends to democracy. This patriarchal stance, that these people known what's best for this nation than the lowly unwashed masses is not democracy. If we one to elect a one eyed purple gorilla to move into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, "We" the people have a right to do just that, and you don't have the right to tell us we're wrong. Or rather to overturn that mandate.

We voted a crook into office in 1972, for the second time. And this country paid the price for letting down our vigilance, as Thomas Jefferson forewarned. But those are lessons we need to learn as a people. We don't need people like your father protecting us from ourselves or our own bad judgment. Why? Because your father's human too, and is also susceptible to error, and bad judgment.

[Wulfstan]

The super delegate vote will also be influenced by the jobs they might be promised by Barack or Hillary in a future administration. If they go against the popular delegate result I shall vote for John McCain.

[jesseln]

SuperDelegates, in my opinion, are the consequence of not having a winner-take-all system like the republicans. If anyone is going to sway the nomination after a 50/50 split, it might as well be our elected officials and people who pay close attention to politics.

If we want to take the power away from SuperDelegates, then we should not pay attention to them. Their vote isn't cemented until the convention anyway, so why let them sway the momentum by acknowledging their current position. We should not ignore their existence, but we should ignore their preference until the August convention.

excerpted from: http://politicalmaelstrom.blogspot.com/

[hopeless277]

"Trust the leaders" has led this nation to calamity. Superdelegates could be it's downfall.

[JXB]

"Beholden to no one" is part of the problem. I find it hard to disagree with Ari's point that the superdelagates should side as a block with the candidate who has won the most pledged delegates. Anything less would seem undemocratic. The candidate who has won the most pledged delegates is the electoral victor, the candidate the people have chosen through the primary/caucus process. A candidate chosen by party officials, many of whom are indeed beholden to no one and none of whom are beholden to the people at large, is something far different, especially if it is the candidate who lost the pledged delegate contest.

[Doofus]

More to the point, 'Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean THEY are NOT out to get you.' -OR- 'An honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought.'

How fortunate we are that so few are honest.

[SDangerfield]

I do hope that you -- and Fournier -- are correct. I fear that it will take a particularly strong pledged-delegate showing in order to shame the DNC superdelegates into hewing to the will fo the primary and caucus voters (and ignoring the ridiculous bleating about MI and FL -- the time to protest the party's decision was when it made the decision, not when the elections break bad for one candidate). That seems to be what Obama is shooting for (and what Clinton cannot accomplish at this point), but if Obama holds a close majority of pledged delegates, the Clinton campaign will continue to push its current "virtual tie" meme, thus trying to rationalize a superdelegate upset.

[MikeP33477]

Good grief! Say what you want about the Clintons, but the truth is experience is more important than hope. "Billary" is respected throughout the world. In this time of war, we NEED that respect. Not another rookie! Obama is as raw as Bush was but without the cowboy hat! If McCain puts Condi Rice on the ticket, say goodbye to the white house!

[BufoAmericanus]

Why?

Because she did such a good job?