Superdelegate System Isn't Just Rigged—Designed to Destroy the Will of the People

Forums: Politics, Us Politics, Superdelegate, Democrats, Oligarchy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

The Superdelegate System Isn't Just Rigged—It's Designed to Destroy the Will of the People

The saying “one person, one vote” has long been inapplicable in America. Lobbyists and corporations with bottomless pockets and empty consciences whisper with their forked tongues into the ears of seemingly every American politician, while their crooked fingers stuff the wallets of Congressperson, Representative, Mayor, and President alike. It’s become sadly ubiquitous in the modern era, and something that’s expected—our government is dishonest.

What has not been clear to most of the general public until the 2016 presidential race is how quickly the so-called superdelegates—719 high-ranking members of the Democratic Party who are automatic delegates to the Democratic National Convention—can nullify an entire region’s (or state’s) voice by simply picking whomever they (or their corporate overlords) prefer, regardless of public sentiment. This has already occurred in Minnesota, Maine, Colorado, Wyoming, New Hampshire and Washington in 2016, to say nothing of this weekend’s shady dealings in Las Vegas. You and your vote are being sold down the river, and if it didn’t affect your candidate this time around—how can you ever be sure it won’t next election cycle?

Consider Wyoming’s contest where Bernie Sanders won the state by a wide 12% margin. Sander’s reward for the victory? Losing the state delegate count 11-7, due to super-delegates. Tens of thousands of tax-paying citizens having their most basic American rights completely discounted by a select few in a matter of moments. The will of the people—utterly and completely ignored.

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/05/the-superdelegate-system-isnt-just-riggedits-desig.html

The damage with super delegates was done at the very beginning of the campaign.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 14 • Views: 2,864 • Replies: 31

It is indeed a great problem for American Democracy which has long been the best model of governing in the world.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

Democracy/isy - Democritus/is - He'd piss himself laughing if he could see what you've 'attached' his name to.

1 Reply

@mark noble,

You think you know what you are talking about, don't you?

Expand, so we can see the extent of your knowledge on the subject..

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

The Primaries are run by each party and they can set the rules however they see fit. The rules have nothing to do with the will of the People, it is the will of the Party.

Which is why I fundamentally hate the "party" system.

Yep, the system has been rigged forever.

"Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two
parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to
draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes.
2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence
in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe,
although not the most wise depositary of the public interests. In
every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they
are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare
themselves." --Thomas Jefferson to Henry Lee, 1824.

1 Reply

@woiyo,

Never really disliked the primary system until this year.

One thing we also need to do is change the election system away from the the two party system it is.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

Only way is to take the money out, meaning corporate and pac's, so even a common man has a chance to run. Would love to see it, but I doubt in our lifetimes that would ever happen.

1 Reply

@woiyo,

We could limit it to personal donors worth no donation over, say $10,000.

Certainly seems to have worked for Bernie Sanders.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

Individuals cannot donate more than $2700 right now. Why would raising that 400% be better?

Edited to add that I understand unlimited super PAC money, but barely any super PAC money was used in the primary on the democratic side

1 Reply

@maporsche,

To remove the argument that dark money and PAC are necessary.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

It would make a lot more sense to just make super PACS keep and publish a liSt of donors

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

There is no evidence that superdelegates have ever made a difference in Democratic party primary results.

It's a red herring to what is going on with the Democrats this primary season.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

I would have to disagree.

In this particular primary election cycle superdelegates made a difference from the start due to the media. From the beginning and throughout the (seemingly) unending journey, they have repeatedly babbled on about all the superdelegates already pledged to Ms.Clinton. Rarely are the results of a primary or caucus given without a mention of her 'already pledged' superdelegates. Voters are affected by this. How many would be voters have just said "screw it" and chosen not to bother voting in their primary?

The media should keep quiet on the tally of superdelegates, allowing the voting process to move forth properly. It is in ways similar to how the media used to give exit polls prior to polls closing- it changes how people vote, or even if they will vote.

3 Replies

@Sturgis,

Maybe it made a difference in the other way too Sturgis.

Maybe people saw Clinton with a huge lead and said, 'you know what I'm going to stay in tonight instead of voting"

Maybe Sanders supporters saw the huge lead and said, 'wow, Bernie is so far behind, I'm going to get all of my friends to go out and vote for him to help him catch up'

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

Voters are affected by this.

what evidence is there that media reports (not a new thing this cycle) have had an impact on voters? who's doing research on this? has it been published? it's been going on long enough that if there was an impact, you'd think there would be well-reported studies on the phenomenon

there was a brouhaha on this (media reports re superdelegates) in 2008 - what came of that?

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Quote:

It would make a lot more sense to just make super PACS keep and publish a liSt of donors

IF we could trust their reportage. I think reporting will only compell them to find a better way of hiding.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Quote:

There is no evidence that superdelegates have ever made a difference in Democratic party primary results.

So whats the point of having them at all, specifically if they have the weight of an elected delegate?

2 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

I've been reading about their history for a while now. Looks to me like it was somebody's idea of a great idea that turned out to be a dud (if not worse). I think they should have dumped the concept at least a decade ago when it proved out to be effectively meaningless.

1 Reply

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81mwAdOjcGL._UL1500_.jpg

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

The use of superdelegates was designed to avoid another embarrassing landslide a la Dukakis, and I sympathize with the impetus, but the superdelegate answer thwarts democracy.

(Didn't mean to respond to you. You seem to be the only person on the thread that already understands.)

1 Reply

Superdelegate System Isn't Just Rigged—Designed to Destroy the Will of the People

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know