Should this be the last time we have superdelegates?

[Ken Burch]

Poll question: Should this be the last time we have superdelegates?

For the first time, there's the real possibility that they could impose a nominee against the will of the majority of elected delegates. This, to me sets a dangerous and undemocratic precedent.

Is there ANY case for having a "two-tiered" nomination process? Can we really assume that "the grownups" have any better handle on what makes an electable nominee than anybody else?

Are we really a DEMOCRATIC party if our nominee isn't chosen democratically?

What do you think?

[busymom]

1. Superdelegates are ridiculous

Why should one citizen's vote count 10,000 times more than another.

Stupid.

[orleans]

3. exactly. and it's really fucking outrageous when you think about it

10,000 votes for 1 s.d.? how the fuck did WE ever allow our party to do shit like that??

(i can say i was probably very busy at the time, extremely self-absorbed and trusting my party would just do the right thing!)

[Syrinx]

2. Yes!

The candidate that gets the most votes should be the nominee.

Why make something more complicated than it needs to be?