Home | About | Donate

In 'Major Step' Toward Making Democratic Party More Democratic, DNC Votes to Roll Back Power of Superdelegates


In 'Major Step' Toward Making Democratic Party More Democratic, DNC Votes to Roll Back Power of Superdelegates

Jake Johnson, staff writer

In an important and long-overdue step toward making the Democratic Party more accountable to voters and less captive to the interests of establishment insiders, the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) Rules and Bylaws arm voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to drastically curtail the influence of superdelegates by barring them from voting on the first ballot of the presidential nomination.


I am cautiously optimistic about this seemingly great news. I am still skeptical, though, based on the Clintons/Establishment’s stranglehold on the party - hard to believe they would allow progressive, non-establishment voices to gain any kind of power. But we shall see.


If I’m understanding this correctly, the only difference that I see, is that they can’t cast their vote, before I cast mine.

Super delegates maintain their power to subvert the will of their particular state.

Just like they did in my state when Bernie Sanders won the vote, but because of superdelegates it was given to Hillary Clinton.

That is undemocratic horseshit and it has got to go.


Yes. Too much room for error and bribes. Electoral College needs to be thrown out. One vote per person. Them we have to deal with counting votes honestly.


While we’re at it, let’s dump the corporate lobbyists too.


Well, good. Since the SC has refused to declare partisan gerrymandering unlawful, every little bit helps.


Neither Clinton nor Sanders had the requisite number of votes for a first ballot win which should have led to an open convention. Under the new rule, as I understand it, the Super Delegates, on subsequent ballots, still hold the power, if no candidate has the needed votes, to be the deciding votes. Super Delegates should be decorative only, with no voting rights.


From the article:

“…DNC chair Tom Perez said during a conference call about the new rule on Wednesday. ‘We have to make sure that we rebuild the trust among many who feel alienated from our party.’”

That ship has already sailed, Tom. Trust, like respect, is earned, NOT owed, and there ARE alternatives.


As I understand it, in a hypothetical outcome between Sanders and Clinton where Sanders actually won more regular delegates (I do believe there were issues which affected his momentum, but I also believe he lost in regular delegate count even if you factor in any controversy - much to my sadness), but lost in this stupid regular + super delegate count, then he would be declared the winner period. If however in a 3 way race, another person got enough delegates that Sanders did not have a majority, that’s when they come into play.

An improvement for sure. I’d rather get rid of them altogether and use modern voting theory (RCV) to elect the winner. But I’ll take it. Hopefully the news media will keep their damn mouth shut on the opinion of the Superdelagates (but they won’t).


Yeah? Name three? Alternatives, that is.


This rule seems fine to me. Super Delegates don’t come in until a second ballot, which is only going to happen if no candidate has a majority of pledged delegates (which Clinton had in 2016). On the next ballot, all delegates become “free,” including pledged. What’s wrong with that?


This is absolutely false. Clinton had a majority of pledged delegates. It wasn’t even close. At no point, did Sanders ever have a majority ever pledged delegates.

In the past, most candidates would have dropped out before Sanders given the math. He really was done in April, if not before.


The perception of a fair primary system is crucial to having people actually vote in primary elections. If this brings more progressive voters to the polls when primary elections occur, then it will be a very good thing. Not just because of the potential effect on the Democratic primary - but because of the important effect it might have on lots of other possible initiatives on the ballot at the same time.


If you’re smart, you’ll figure it out.


Yeah? If you’re a Republican operative/apparatchik then you figured it out in 2016, as well. And, if you’re a Republican, it’s none of your business what the Democratic Party, does or doesn’t, do. Correct?


I believe that Sanders had a lead in pledged delegates after New Hampshire and maintained it through Nevada. He fell apart in South Carolina and was basically out of if after Super Tuesday a few days later and the following Tuesday fell even further behind. Because there are no winner-take-all-states the race was at that point over without an amazing reversal which never happened. Because he depended on small contributions he was able to stay the race until the end. It turned out not to be nearly as close as 2008 but was not a total blow out. Sanders did win a lot of states and wound up behind by about 400 pledged delegates. He did much better than most experts predicted. No doubt that he ran a great campaign but he was never able to get enough votes in diverse states. Mainly he did well in mostly rural states with overwhelmingly white populations.


Hardly. I was a northeast regional delegate to the Citizens Party’s national convention in 1984. I’ve never voted R, and the last time I voted D in any election beyond local level was for George McGovern in 1972.


How many citizens were in the The Citizens Party in 1984? Besides yourself, that is? What state ballots did the Citizens Party appear on, aside from the state where you and Bob the Plumber, were delegates? R U threatening the party which received the most votes in the Presidential Election of 2016, from a rubber room in a gated and fenced compound, somewhere?


Your arrogant, bullying and offensive tone is a major reason that people are deserting your stinking, corrupt party in droves.

You’re a Whig in the making, soon to be a footnote to history. A richly deserved oblivion awaits your kind.


Bernie would have had more delegates if the Demorats had not rigged the primary against him.