Home | About | Donate

The Democratic Party’s ‘Superdelegates’ Are Super Wrong


The Democratic Party’s ‘Superdelegates’ Are Super Wrong

Norman Solomon

When I was a teenage volunteer for Eugene McCarthy’s presidential campaign in 1968, one of the aspects of the national Democratic Party power structure that bothered me the most — apart from its support for the horrendous Vietnam War — was its internal barriers to democracy. Those barriers turned out to be major stumbling blocks for peace advocates as they lost the party’s presidential nomination to then-Vice President Hubert Humphrey.


I totally agree that all the progressive, so-called, should stand with the voters of their district and not follow the party power elite in choosing Hillary Clinton. This welcome idea probably ought to be turned into a petition for the voters in each district to pledge their support for this idea and perhaps also to pledge not to vote for any super delegate who turns his/her back on their constituents.

Additionally, I still remember the CDC, California Democratic Council, in the early - mid 60s that tried to be more progressive and got shut down by Jesse Unruh and Alan Cranston and the likes so this was an active tactic even before the McCarthy campaign.


Both parties will have a lot of unpledged delegates at the convention. This is one reason why Trump is not a sure bet to win the Republican nomination. The Democrat superdelegates can change their mind on who to support and often do. Huffman and others could switch to Sanders. Both the Sanders and the Clinton campaign can make their case to the superdelegates.


TAPPER: Hillary Clinton lost to Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire by 22 percentage points, the biggest victory in a contested Democratic primary there since John F. Kennedy, but it looks as though Clinton and Sanders are leaving the Granite State with the same number of delegates in their pockets because Clinton has the support of New Hampshire’s superdelegates, these party insiders. What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it’s all rigged?

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: … Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists.

We need more questions like this one from Jake Tapper to Debbie Wasserman Schultz [video]

See? Sometimes even Debbie tells the truth!


No matter the FACTS on the ground, your comments speak to a fairness that doesn’t exist.

If the super-delegates are party insiders and Clinton is the establishment favorite, then disproporationate support goes to (as is obviously the case) the establishment candidate.

Your quote is dishonest. This seemingly neutral stance is like that of giving equal respect to the rapist and the woman who was raped.


One thing that I have clearly learned in this election cycle is that the election process in the United States is fixed.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


The same Alan Cranston who was later (along with John McCain) part of the infamous Keating Five who enabled the 1980s Savings and Loan debacle ?


Caucuses leading up to the convention are no less a shell game when you consider that only voters who can show up at their caucus location at a specific hour can participate in what I charitably characterize as an ephemeral process. Caucuses are totally controlled by the Party and not subject to ANY of the rules to which balloted elections are subject.


It looks like the nomination process has got to become a bigger issue. They rig the game and then will say we picked Hillary? People have to make them worry that they are going to far and treating people like fools.

We want to vote!!!

They are taking away our ability to vote for who we want by rigging the game. We need to make them think twice about doing that to us. Hillary would lose her base and be a disaster as a president and worse for the Dems legitimacy.


Wikipedia’s lists of who has endorsed Bernie and Hillary confirm an even more lopsided scale. Hillary’s list reads like a who’s who of corruption including Silvio Berlusconi, Nicolas Sarkowzy, Alice Walton, Tony Blair, the usual Hollyweird suspects, and way too many self described Congressional progressives.


People need to focus on the nomination process. They present this superdelate paternalism as if there was no other choice. It is anti-democracy to have these unelected delegates control the voting which is what is happening. The entrenched politicians don’t trust the voting process to reflect their wishes so they take away our right to choose whom to vote for.

People should be up in arms about the superdelegates.


The Democrats’ websites and other documents describing the primaries as an opportunity for us to “HELP elect a nominee”, not elect a nominee, says it all.


And balloted elections are often hacked and flipped, especially if close.


Why stop with SUPER-delegates? WTF are delegates, whom do they actually, as opposed to supposedly, represent? Why, in caucuses and primaries, are we not ACTUALLY, rather than theoretically, selecting a candidate? Granted, I distrust “the people” inherently, almost as much as those who “represent” “us”. But like somebody once said…democracy is the worst possible system, except for all the others. So, we may as well give it a try. For a change.


Everywhere you look you see crowds of passionate Bernie supporters. I haven’t seen that for HRC.


I know right? I also know that any candidate that showed they had such enthusiasm among voters would have been raised on a pedestal by the party. We are old enough ( I am too old by any measure and about everything lol) to remember past elections with popular candidates. Specifically Reagan and even Nixon both of whom had landslides. When people like a candidate the parties accentuate it until it becomes infectious. They have done the opposite with Bernie and have tried to dampen down enthusiasm. People are going to feel cheated and betrayed if the rigged game succeeds in keeping Bernie out. The Dems really are gambling this time though I bet they pooh pooh that notion and dismiss the voters. It is really sickening to think that they do this to our democracy… You know the people who talk about Of, Byand For the people and that stuff? It will ring hollow after the rigged game and that is a risk we don’t need to take. Bernie is no Che but just a very decent person which our democracy does need. An honest politician.


If we want fair and democratic elections and representation, we must:

  • Abolish the electoral college,

  • Implement instant run-off voting (a.k.a. ranked choice voting), and

  • Convert to proportional representation.

Until these three things happen, democracy is an illusion.




Nicely put. We could try it once just to see ya know?