What will most superdelegates actually do?

[MineralMan]

The answer to that depends on understanding what their function really is. They're not there to override the pledged delegates allocated according to the primary or caucus votes. Their function is really to deal with a convention where more than two candidates cause a situation where non candidate has a majority of those pledged delegates.

In such a case, the votes of the superdelegates can forestall a convention that is in an impasse. At a convention where there are only two candidates, one or the other will have a majority of pledged delegates.

In 2016, we have only two candidates. One will go to the convention with a majority of pledged delegates. The superdelegates who are primarily made up of elected Democratic House members, Senators and Governors, along with members of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), who are elected in their own states at that state's convention. A few distinguished Democrats make up the rest of the group, but are not so many in number.

If there is, as there will be this year, a candidate who has a majority of the pledged delegates, the vast majority of the 714 superdelegates will vote for that candidate to be the nominee of the party. A few may vote for the other candidate, out of loyalty or some other reason, but the candidate who has the majority of pledged delegates at the convention will become the nominee.

Unpledged superdelegates do not have to divide according to the results in their state. Almost all of them were elected to their offices by the Democrats in their state already. They have voter approval from even before the primary campaigns started. They are independent, by design.

It would be shocking and completely uncharacteristic of these long-time, loyal Democratic politicians to vote against the will of the people, as expressed by the delegates pledged to the candidates. They won't do that. They will vote for the candidate with the majority of the pledged delegates.

It's that simple, really. That is what will happen at the end of July. Following the last primary elections, we will know who the nominee will be. We may know even sooner than that if one of the two candidates earns a number of pledged delegates that represents a majority.

The superdelegates will not vote for the candidate who does not have a majority of pledged delegates. They are all dedicated members of the Democratic Party, and will vote accordingly.

[merrily]

1. Anyone who is confident that Hillary will win a majority of pledged delegates should not

perseverate about super delegates.

[CalvinballPro]

3. Anyone who thinks that super-delegates are undemocratic should question why Sanders needs them.

And also why the possibility of them switching to him is the only hope keeping his campaign alive.

[merrily]

5. Illogical non sequitur. KNOWING super delegates are undemocratic has zero to do with needing them.

The super delegates are unquestionably undemocratic, and the rules of the Democratic Party give them almost a fifth of the vote. The entire nation, 4/5. Super delegates, 1/5. And the Democratic Party uses the same electoral college type system that most Democrats are trying to dump, which makes the popular vote less important. That's why candidates need them.

[CalvinballPro]

6. Democrats can run their party however they want to. Freedom of association, maybe you heard of it?

If you don't like the rules, found your own party and run it however you see fit.

But progressives would never do that, because founding a party is a) hard work, b) takes time, and c) would require actually focusing on local, state, and Congressional races, which are basically kryptonite to far leftists more concerned with appearing to be the most ideologically pure rather than achieving actual results.

And no, it's not a non-sequitur to point out that the same campaign that has been blasting super-delegates for weeks now because they've largely aligned against its candidate is suddenly preaching that they'll all flip to their candidate based on the votes in 3 small-population caucus states.

Sanders is arguing that super-delegates should support him even if he hasn't won the majority of pledged delegates, as in the ones awarded by the voters. I genuinely want to see a Sanders supporter explain why invalidating the preferences of millions of Democratic voters so Bernie can win the nomination isn't undemocratic.

[merrily]

13. Sorry, your prior post was indeed an illogical non sequitur. So is your Reply 6.

Whether Democrats can--and have--made their own rules has zero to do with whether those rules are undemocratic.

And your comment about Freedom of Association is condescending and reveals a lack of ability to distinguish between the rules that an association, such as the Democratic Party, makes for its internal governance and freedom of two or more people to associate with each other. You're tossing spaghetti against a wall and hoping something sticks, but it's all just sliding to the floor in a nasty, tangled mess.

[MineralMan]

7. I will post informational OPs here as I see fit, thanks.

I imagine you will do the same. You are, of course, welcome to give me advice, but it's really not necessary.

Further, if Bernie Sanders goes to the convention with a majority of pledged delegates, the superdelegates will vote for him in the majority, as well, and he will become the nominee. The information I provided is not partisan. It is simply how things work.

[merrily]

14. I did not suggest you not post. So, no call for drama, a victim card or that particular straw man.

I said nothing about your info being partisan, either, so you may as well let that straw man rest, too.

As far as advice, you are not shy about opining, nor should you be.

Overall, unless you've changed your name to "anyone" your reply seems like you took a general statement I made very personally and/or used it as a pretense to play victim and lecture me. Can't imagine why you'd do that. Well, maybe I can.

[CalvinballPro]

2. In other words, they don't care one lick about "momentum." Nor should they. nt

[Scuba]

4. After the election? Some of Hillary's will go back to the XL Pipeline and private prison ....

... industries.

Lee Fang at The Intercept has identified a number of DNC superdelegates: one works for the Clinton campaign and is a former lobbyist for a private prison group and for TransCanada to build support for the Keystone XL pipeline; another works for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation; three DNC superdelegates, writes Fang, are officials at “a lobbying firm that is closely affiliated with the Clinton campaign and retained by the Clinton-supporting Super PACs Priorities USA Action and Correct the Record.”

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/26/antidote-dnc-bias-against-bernie-massive-grassroots-turnout

[MineralMan]

8. OK. That's interesting, I suppose.

However, there are 714 superdelegates. Are a few of those lobbyists? If they're DNC members, then they were elected to their positions at their state's conventions. They must also be prominent leaders in their states' Democratic Party organizations.

I know who the DNC members from Minnesota have been. They're all prominent business people or otherwise very recognizable individuals. They make up a minority of the superdelegates from this state. The majority are elected Democrats in Congress, our governor, or a former Vice President of the United States.

You want to know who Minnesota's DNC members were in 2015? Here's a link that has biographies of all of them:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/off-the-bus-reporter/dnc-minnesota-superdelega_b_89005.html

Some of them will continue to be DNC members. They are elected at our state convention.

You're talking about half a dozen or fewer superdelegates who are lobbyists. They have one vote each at the convention.

[Scuba]

9. I find it more than interesting that Hillary would allow an XL Pipeline lobbyist on her team...

... and even more interesting that she allows a private prison lobbyist on her team.




I guess when one cozies up to Henry Kissinger there's no stench to rancid.

[MineralMan]

11. Hillary Clinton has nothing whatsoever to do with who the

superdelegates are. Each state has superdelegates. You can see how they are selected by clicking the state links at this page:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D

Clinton has nothing to do with their selection. Nothing at all. Are some associated with her campaign? That's a different matter, altogether. Those who are DNC members have careers of their own. It's good to educate yourself about such things from orginal sources. Search on Google for "DNC Members" and add any state and you'll find out who they are.

[Scuba]

12. She accepts the support from XL Pipeline and private prisons. It's on her. She could ...

... call out this hypocrisy and disavow herself of their support but she doesn't. It's on her.

[Gothmog]

10. Super delegates will vote in the best interest of the party including down ballot races