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

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 08:26 PM Mar 2016

Let's play the truly nightmarish superdelegate game guaranteed to schism everyone

Most superdelegates should end up supporting who the people choose, right?

So, in the unlikely event that one candidate ends up winning the popular vote while the other wins the delegate count, which one should get the supers? No names in the scenario, so no bias to either candidate.

I'm going to go with the delegate leader, as that is the official way the party is measuring who wins, but holy shit, tell me that this scenario would not be a CF of massive proportions.

Edit: this is in regards to how people think the Superdelegates will blow up the party. The scenario described above is said to have happened in 2008 without too much of a ripple effect. I think I might have been either not too much or too much over the top in the OP. Ah well, it seemed better in my head.

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Let's play the truly nightmarish superdelegate game guaranteed to schism everyone (Original Post) Godhumor Mar 2016 OP
Isn't that what happened in 2008? virtualobserver Mar 2016 #1
...Yes Godhumor Mar 2016 #2
It has to be delegates virtualobserver Mar 2016 #4
Yeah, the OP was not nearly as bitingly caustic yet intelligent as I hoped Godhumor Mar 2016 #5
this is why delegate systems in general are not a good idea restorefreedom Mar 2016 #3
What if they awarded the number of the percentage bigwillq Mar 2016 #6
interesting. i would like to see a model restorefreedom Mar 2016 #7
Delegate leader. The supers are totally irrelevant, morningfog Mar 2016 #8
 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
4. It has to be delegates
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 08:37 PM
Mar 2016

If we had 50 primaries, I might give some consideration to the popular vote, but with our current mix of primaries and caucuses, there are no other options.

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
5. Yeah, the OP was not nearly as bitingly caustic yet intelligent as I hoped
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 08:38 PM
Mar 2016

Ah well, I'm going to call it a good try and move on.

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts)
3. this is why delegate systems in general are not a good idea
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 08:31 PM
Mar 2016

all states should have primaries on or two national primary days in june ish, so the candidates have plenty of time to travel and campaign. publicly funded elections, of course. one person, one vote.

and lets ditch the ec while we are at it.

back in the real world, yes, if one candidate gets a pop vote and one gets delegates, it could be sticky depending on the spread of each.

and no more supers

 

bigwillq

(72,790 posts)
6. What if they awarded the number of the percentage
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 08:57 PM
Mar 2016

won in each state based on popular vote?

The candidate would still need to reach some designated threshold (let the math majors figure that out) but it would eliminate delegates.


I am not good at math, and my idea is basically like allocating delegates like they do now, but it would eliminate delegates and super-delegates.

To break ties, just round up to the next number. (.5 or above, round up to next #. Example, 68.5, round to 69) (.5 or below, keep that number. Example, 27.3. Keep at 27).

I really have no idea but I am not a huge fan of delegates, super or otherwise. And it's not sour grapes. Would rather have the popular vote count, even if none of my candidates never win again. Just throwing an idea out there. It may be awful, and that's fine.

So, if the race ended today:


Hillary
50 (Iowa)
38 (NH)
53 (Nevada)
74 (SC)
78 (Alabama)
68 (Samoa)
66 (Arkansas)
40 (Colorado)
71 (Georgia)
50 (Mass)
38 (Minnesota)
42 (Oklahoma)
66 (TENN)
65 (Texas)
14 (Vermont)
64 (VA)
32 (Kansas)
71 (LA)
45 (Nebraska)
36 (Maine)
48 (MICH)
83 (MISS)
Totals: 1192 % 22=54.1

Bernie
50 (Iowa)
61 (NH)
47 (Nevada)
26 (SC)
19 (Alabama)
26 (Samoa)
30 (Arkansas)
59 (Colorado)
28 (Georgia)
49 (Mass)
62 (Minnesota)
52 (Oklahoma)
32 (TENN)
33 (Texas)
86 (Vermont)
35 (VA)
68 (Kansas)
23 (LA)
55 (Nebraska)
64 (Maine)
50 (MICH)
17 (MISS)
Total: 972 % 22= 44.1

Difference=220

Current pledged delegate difference=205

restorefreedom

(12,655 posts)
7. interesting. i would like to see a model
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:04 PM
Mar 2016

of how it compares to a pure pop vote.

agree that delegstes need to go away though

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
8. Delegate leader. The supers are totally irrelevant,
Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:18 PM
Mar 2016

more like a doomsday bomb. They may be deployed to stop a candidate, but it would Also destroy the party.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Let's play the truly nigh...