Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dooner

(1,217 posts)
Mon Mar 7, 2016, 12:52 AM Mar 2016

Super Delegates: GOP vs Dems

GOP's rules for super delegates are apparently much different than the Dems.
Each party sets it's own policy.

GOP has fewer super delegates, and they must vote for the candidate their state voted for in the primaries.

Apparently Dem Super Delegates are so much smarter than the people they represent, they can do whatever they want?
Assuming the DNC set the rules...

Dem system doesn't seem very democratic. Or am I missing something.

Here's an article
http://www.bustle.com/articles/141611-does-the-gop-have-superdelegates-the-republican-partys-nomination-rules-are-different-this-year

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Super Delegates: GOP vs Dems (Original Post) dooner Mar 2016 OP
Superdelegates added in 1984 pat_k Mar 2016 #1
Superdelegates were pro-Mondale, actually Bucky Mar 2016 #3
Yes, I think they were hoping for Cuomo pat_k Mar 2016 #4
This thread inspired me to write an essay (link) Bucky Mar 2016 #5
That's Great! Bookmarked. pat_k Mar 2016 #6
Of course it also means that the GOP is stuck with TexasTowelie Mar 2016 #2
Exactly. Thank you. NurseJackie Mar 2016 #7

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
1. Superdelegates added in 1984
Mon Mar 7, 2016, 01:10 AM
Mar 2016

They were apparently unhappy with the Carter/Mondale ticket.

And then they were unhappy with Mondale, so they added more.

Yep. Democrats don't trust democracy.

Bucky

(53,795 posts)
3. Superdelegates were pro-Mondale, actually
Mon Mar 7, 2016, 01:29 AM
Mar 2016

Mondale was the establishment candidate that year. I remember that cause it was my first election cycle. But, yes, the superdelegate system was very much designed with the thought of counterbalancing a Carter-type insurgent again.

I think was also anti-Jackson in sentiment. Of course in 1988 & 1992 there really wasn't a single "establishment" candidate. I think the big wigs kept holding out for Cuomo to jump in. Odd years in the desert for us Dems.

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
4. Yes, I think they were hoping for Cuomo
Mon Mar 7, 2016, 02:58 AM
Mar 2016

Thinking of those years really takes me back, all the way to the McGovern campaign. In 72 I was in my teens and remember being part of a babysitting and transport service that helped folks get to the polls.

(And I'm sure the fact that Carter's devastating loss was just two cycles after McGovern contributed to the panic, and impulse to institute more establishment control.)

I suspect the Republicans may do the same after this year!

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
6. That's Great! Bookmarked.
Mon Mar 7, 2016, 05:49 AM
Mar 2016

Reminds me of so many details of the past 9 election cycles I haven't thought about in a long time. Thank you!

I know we're in deep trouble. Putting into context is helpful... and, as you say, paints a worrisome picture.

TexasTowelie

(111,280 posts)
2. Of course it also means that the GOP is stuck with
Mon Mar 7, 2016, 01:23 AM
Mar 2016

the flavor of the month candidate that is usually decided by low information voters.

The Democrats use superdelegates because it considers the candidates longer term involvement (yes, even if it means establishment) with the party. I sometimes wonder if Democrats would be professing the wisdom of the superdelegate system if a popular conservative from the GOP raided the party to win the nomination.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Super Delegates: GOP vs D...