How should superdelegates cast their vote?

[Redbear]

Poll question: How should superdelegates cast their vote?

Since they will be the ones who will decide who wins.

[tekisui]

1. The top three will likely be the same candidate.

[k8conant]

5. I agree that this year the top 3 will be the same...

:kick:

[Onlooker]

2. They have to vote their conscience

There's no other way. You can't ask, for instance, Kennedy and Kerry to vote for Clinton simply because she won Massachusetts. If they find out 2 weeks before the election that the candidate with the most pledged delegates is actually on a sex-offenders list in his home state, you can't expect them to vote for that person. If they don't believe the one with more pledged delegates is capable of doing a good job, they should not vote for him or her. That said, if they vote their conscience it's more than likely that the candidate with the most pledged delegates will win. I doubt very much that Clinton can win the nomination from the Superdelegates unless she closes to within 20 delegates of Obama.

Aslo, I'm pretty sure that pledged delegates, not just superdelegates, can change their vote.

[the other one]

3. What is the point in them if they don't vote how they want?

Welcome to the not quite democratic party. The superdelegates will decide the race, and they are not going to choose Obama. This is the best move, politically, but it will piss off a lot of Obama supporters.

[Dawgs]

9. How would picking the candidate that the voters didn't choose the best move politically?

:shrug:

[Meshuga]

4. I would say other

Using the first and the second options as factors.

[Recursion]

6. If they don't vote their conscience, they should be abolished

There's no sense having a block of superdelegates that exist only to do what their constituents said.

[shenmue]

7. If they vote any way other than the first pick on the list, they are not being true to their duty.

If they bring personal resentment into it, they are seriously amiss as to the meaning of the democratic process.

[Redbear]

8. I cant see a superdelegate saying:

I definitely believe Candidate Jefferson is the superior candidate and is more
likely to win in the general election.

However, Candidate Hamilton has 49.8% of the pledged delegates and Jefferson only has 49.6% of the pledged delegates, so what I think doesnt matter.

[Dawgs]

10. Actually it will be more like 52% to 48%, but nice try.

And, I can't see a candidate saying that Candidate Hamilton has proven to be the most likely to win in the general with the most pledged delegates, but I'll vote for candidate Jefferson to destroy the party.

[Redbear]

12. Okay using those numbers. I cant see a superdelegate saying

I think Jefferson is more likley to win in November but Hamilton has 52% of the pledged deegates, so what I think doesnt matter.

[IsItJustMe]

11. In general I would say that they should not over ride the intent of the electorate.

[Milo_Bloom]

13. This sUUUper delegate thing is getting funny.

Here's the reality, for CLinton to get to 2025, the remaining undecided sUUUper delegates would have to break for her nearly 70/30

Clinton has 1222 pleged and 242 sUUUper delegates = 1464

600 Delegates remain, of which she will win, AT BEST, 55% (more likely 50%, we will go with 55% for fun) = 1794

There are 346 uncommitted super delegates. FOr her to get to 2025, she needs 231 of them to go for her (67%). Even with her name and original air of inevitability, she was only able to get the pleged super delegates to break for her 53/47

IF Obama gets the 50 delegate bomb, she would need close to 80% of the remaining... if she only gets 50% of the remaining pledged delegates, she would need nearly 75% of the super delegates to break her way. If she only gets 50% of the remaining pledged delgates AND the 50 delegate bomb happens, she would need more than 80% of the remaining.

These current sUUUper delegates are not sheep who move in a flock and will likely split up in numbers similar or close to what the previous sUUUper delegates have done.

[Redbear]

15. You are assuming no Florida and Michigan

You add those two back in and it really gets crazy.

[Milo_Bloom]

16. Even if they revote, the math remains the same

Clinton NEEDS some type of major blowout, which just isn't going to happen.

She lost to "none of the above" in MI the first time around and would likely lose to Obama in a revote. She would likely win Florida, but there you wind up with a wash between the 2 states.

So far he has been winning the pledged delegates about 53/47 and she is winning the suuper delegates 53/47 The problem for her is that pledged delegates out number suuuper delegates by about 4 to 1 and there aren't enough contests left for her to make a real dent in the lead and there aren't enough suuuper delegates for her current trends (or even reasonable acceleration of her trends) to change the outcome.

[Redbear]

19. Actually she beat "none of the above" in MI

Clinton 55
Uncommitted 40
Kucinich 3.7
Dodd 0.6
Gravel 0.4

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/MI.html

[Milo_Bloom]

20. I don't know where I read that none of the above won...

Either way, she won't win it in a revote, so it would wind up a wash with Florida.

[kentuck]

14. The entire delegation, not just the Super Delegates...

shold vote by secret ballot if it comes to that. And I suspect it will.

[npincus]

17. Let me guess: HRC supporters want superdelegates to decide

(top line of poll)... I think they ought to start their own website "Un-Democratic Underground".

[Redbear]

18. I voted for Obama

and I think superdelegates should vote for who they think will be the best president.

The same standard I used when I cast my vote for Obama in the Texas primary and Texas caucus.

[Flabbergasted]

21. I think all of those should be considerations along with who is more likely

to bring about the biggest majority in Congress.