Welcome to PatsFans.com

What is Democratic About Superdelegates?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by IcyPatriot, Mar 31, 2008.

  1. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ~~~Out of Order~~~ PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,491
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +24 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    I need some help understanding a few things about the democrats ... perhaps some here will offer their help. For the last 8 years I have read and heard (especially here) about the republicans and Bush being control freaks, fascists, denying rights of our Constitution, not following our Constitution ... and all the rest ... you know how that theme goes.

    So now we see Hillary (who btw is the candidate I like of the 3) staying in the race because she believes, or already knows ... that she can wil the primary if she can gather enough superdelegates. You know, the party elite that can vote however they choose ... in spite of the will of the people, they can and might vote as they choose.

    Is that democratic I ask?

    Is that much different than what the republicans/Bush are accused of all the time?

    Hey ... I don't blame Hillary one bit ... I mean she feels she is the better candidate of the two ... I agree with her. However, what does it say of a general election when one candidate was chosen by the people and the other was chosen by the "Democrat Elites".

    She bagged Murtha ... huge bag that is for him ... and his 3 amigos today. Does Murtha not care what the people are saying? Or perhaps because it's mostly blacks and young mush heads ... they are only voting for Obama because he is black? and young? or black and young?

    It's a fair question.

    So a bunch of young (all races) people and African-American people want Obama but he can posibly be denied by a bunch of mainly white party elitist people.

    How is this different than what Bush is accused of ... I don't understand?

    In any case ... Go Hillary!!!
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2008
  2. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    NEM what is obsolete about the electoral college? It was designed to ensure all states had a more balanced representation in electing a President, that still needs to be true today. If we went to a popular vote you'd be taking away the ability of smaller states to have any say in election of the President. The idea of ensuring power of states to decide federal government beyond simply being represented in proportion to population is a founding principle of our country. It was something the founders thought long and hard about, and the idea behind it is the reason we have a Senate instead of just a house of representatives. To change that changes the very basics of this country's governance.

    At any rate I don't think there could ever be an amendment to change it to popular vote, I don't think enough states would support that. Also the idea that states could collaborate to set up their own popular vote-based system I think is in violation of the Constitution as well, so like it or not I think we're keeping the electoral college for a while yet.
  3. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    That doesn't ring right to me...there's a huge difference between the Presidential election and representation in the Legislature. How does the vote of ten people in Vermont differ from ten people in California? There's no compelling interest that Rhode Island has that would be threatened by the voting power of California. Doesn't Northern California have vastly different interests than Southern California? Why not split the electoral votes for those disparate regions? Same goes for coastal Maine and the rest of Maine. It's one man holding the office, not a political bloc.

    I favor a straight-up vote for the POTUS. It works for the election for the governor of California. California has a larger population than the entire 13 Original States did. I don't like this anti-representative process at all.
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2008
  4. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,229
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -3


    The electorial college was to give the smaller states a larger representation in the presidential election. The US was formed as a collection of states who were far more powerful that the states we see today (at least in terms of their power relative to the federal government). Other wise no would care about RI WYO AK or other states with small populations.
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,229
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -3


    The logical conclusion is to do away with the states altogether. I like the idea of a republic rather than a pure democracy.
  6. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,287
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -1

    See Below.

    Bingo.
  7. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,287
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -1

    I'm curious what democrats will be saying if/when Obama wins the most delegates, yet Hillary wins the popular vote.

    :eek:
  8. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    If the democrats do it, it's OK.

    They see nothing wrong with dead people voting as long as the dead vote for the democrat
  9. STFarmy

    STFarmy Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    OOOH snap, electoral college discussion. I'm with Stokes and RW on this one (shocker, I know), but it needs to be kept. Besides the representation issue, it solidifies a very important principle of the framers of the Constitution: that direct democracy is a bad thing. As most of you here know, the rhetoric thrown out by politicians about our "democracy" is just crap. We technically live in a constitutional republic, with democratic principles. Their aversion to direct democracies comes from the Classical Greek and Roman education, which contained lots and lots of philosophers who condemned direct democracy (Aristotle and Plato notably). Athens, with their direct democracy, had problems governing themselves and fell into tyranny numerous times. This is what they were scared of - they didn't want the minds of the people to be swayed by a charismatic, yet nefarious, figure. Caesar was their greatest example. He gained the adoration of the public through his massive appeal and military conquests in Gaul. The Roman people loved him. And what did he do? He took over and became a tyrant. So tossing out the Electoral College, I think, would be bad. Sure, we face different issues, but this system has worked pretty well despite the gripes about it.

    The Federalist Papers SHOULD be a required reading for every citizen, as it will give you a coherent thought process of how the Constitution was developed and why it was put that way. But of course, they'd rather focus on other things in public school, and then have a nation of idiots. I'm pretty libertarian, but that's one of the few things I can think of that I would force people to do.
  10. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Oh really?
    Then please explain why Alaska has 3 electoral votes and California has 55!

    Do your research before you contradict the master!:rocker:

    http://www.fec.gov/pages/elecvote.htm
  11. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Back to the point of the thread:

    "Superdelegates" are anything but democratic or representative of the vote. They have been created by party rules outside of Constitutional parameters. Nowhere in the Constitution or US law is the establishment of "Superdelegates" explained, condoned or established. It is purely a creation of the Parties who control the conduct of their primaries ...as we have seen in Florida and Michigan.

    Clinton will kick and scream about Fla and Mich all she wants, but Dean and Co. have already made up their minds. The Superdelegates will be the ones who ultimately decide who the nominee for the Dem Party is - not the voters.

    "Unlike most convention delegates, the superdelegates are not selected based on the party primaries and caucuses in each U.S. state, in which voters choose among candidates for the party's presidential nomination. Instead, most of the superdelegates are seated automatically, based solely on their status as current or former party leaders and elected officials ("PLEOs"). Others are chosen during the primary season. All the superdelegates are free to support any candidate for the nomination....."

    "...At the 2008 Democratic National Convention the superdelegates will make up approximately one-fifth of the total number of delegates. The closeness of the race between the leading contenders, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, has increased the chance that the superdelegates will play a decisive role in selecting the nominee, a prospect that has caused unease among some Democratic Party leaders..."


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,229
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -3



    Based on pipulation along CA would have 53 electorial ovtes vas Ak with 1.

    53/1 > 55/3. So propoetonaly Ak had a greater % of electorial votes. Electorial votes is number of congressmen (det for each state based on population) + number of senators (fixed at 2 per state regardless of population).
  13. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Not significant enough of a difference. The "proportion theory" of yours is, while true and accurate, not significant enough to make a real difference in political capital. California still has 55 and Alaska still has 3. What's "equalizing" about that?

    You still don't get the fact that this is not Congress- it's the election of the president. Congress was weighted to compensate for smaller states getting crushed by the larger ones in legislating...that's all. The Senate is two per state. That is the only mechanism for balancing the power granted by the constitution. The Parties control their rules of primaries. The electoral college means very little until the general election. If a party so decides, they could make all of their delegates "Super". But that would be a dead giveaway to the voters that their vote doesn't matter during the primaries.
  14. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,287
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -1

    Just cuz you like it when people choose who will represent you, it doesn't mean everyone else should. I don't want a back room full of side deals deciding who my choice for president is. No thanks. The electoral college is set up so as to represent the states in as equal a fashion as is possible. We, as in the USA, are a union of independent states, and not a mob or urbanites who get to choose for everyone else. :D
  15. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,716
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    NEM is pretty much a cradle to grave socialist, so this should not surprise you.

    Pretty much the election this year comes down to Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. No other state is going to flip color, maybe New Hampshire will go for McCain, doubtful will all the Massachusetts immigrants, but that is basically it.
  16. Boston Boxer

    Boston Boxer U.S. Air Force Retired PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    what do you bring to the discussion? I have not seen one post from you that adds anything but trying to start a riot. You are a tool
  17. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,287
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -1

    Why pick on Harry Boy? We all know to take HB's posts with a grain of salt.
  18. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Do you think you're auditioning for moderator?

    :rolleyes:
  19. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,716
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    What part of Harry's post was incorrect?
  20. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    They say the same thing about Coulter/O'Reilly/Hannity and Clyde Winston Fnurr, they are all household names and the only book that tops their books is the Bible, we are the ressurection and the saviors of the new America.

    Prince Obooma and Pant Suit Hillary fear us, they refuse to debate us, we are putting CBS and NBC right out of business, we will report than you can decide.
    Barbara Striesand has never been camping.


    Remember Where You Heard It

    :bricks:
  21. jack

    jack Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    [​IMG]
  22. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    I got a dog just like that, he can climb trees.
  23. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ~~~Out of Order~~~ PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,491
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +24 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    That small circle looks like Bill Polian ... he's looking to the right ... his left.

Share This Page