California Democrats call for elimination of superdelegates and caucuses
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:32:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  California Democrats call for elimination of superdelegates and caucuses
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: California Democrats call for elimination of superdelegates and caucuses  (Read 2741 times)
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,142
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2016, 01:34:39 PM »

This isn't the 60s. Superdelegates will never have the balls to overturn the will of the people, unless the primary is a virtual tie. So having them accomplishes nothing and simply breeds resentment about a "rigged process" every cycle. If PLEOs don't want to have to run for delegate slots, then just allocate them based off the popular vote. Easy.

Just look at the GOP. They could easily unbind their delegates if they wanted to and ditch Trump. But they won't, because they fear overturning the will of the voters would destroy their party. The same goes for the Democratic side, so superdelegates serve no purpose. Even in a scenario where superdelegates don't exist and Dems had the balls to do it, they could just unbind the delegates like some in the GOP are considering doing. There's no functional difference in having superdelegates and not having them, unless you enjoy the constant bitching about it every primary cycle. Do you really think 99.9% of people will care whether the will of the people was overturned by superdelegates or if the will of the people was overturned by the Rules Committee unbinding the delegates? The only part that will matter is "will of people overturned."
The clueless people (i.e some Bernie supporters, etc)  would find something else to complain about, methinks. It's not worth it placating them in this instance.
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,107
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 29, 2016, 03:07:59 PM »

Good for them standing up for a clean, fair democratic process.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 29, 2016, 05:23:50 PM »

This isn't the 60s. Superdelegates will never have the balls to overturn the will of the people, unless the primary is a virtual tie. So having them accomplishes nothing and simply breeds resentment about a "rigged process" every cycle. If PLEOs don't want to have to run for delegate slots, then just allocate them based off the popular vote. Easy.

Just look at the GOP. They could easily unbind their delegates if they wanted to and ditch Trump. But they won't, because they fear overturning the will of the voters would destroy their party. The same goes for the Democratic side, so superdelegates serve no purpose. Even in a scenario where superdelegates don't exist and Dems had the balls to do it, they could just unbind the delegates like some in the GOP are considering doing. There's no functional difference in having superdelegates and not having them, unless you enjoy the constant bitching about it every primary cycle. Do you really think 99.9% of people will care whether the will of the people was overturned by superdelegates or if the will of the people was overturned by the Rules Committee unbinding the delegates? The only part that will matter is "will of people overturned."
The clueless people (i.e some Bernie supporters, etc)  would find something else to complain about, methinks. It's not worth it placating them in this instance.

It's not just a Bernie thing though. There was much gnashing of teeth on all sides about them in 2008 as well.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,142
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 29, 2016, 06:23:57 PM »
« Edited: June 29, 2016, 06:31:23 PM by TimTurner »

This isn't the 60s. Superdelegates will never have the balls to overturn the will of the people, unless the primary is a virtual tie. So having them accomplishes nothing and simply breeds resentment about a "rigged process" every cycle. If PLEOs don't want to have to run for delegate slots, then just allocate them based off the popular vote. Easy.

Just look at the GOP. They could easily unbind their delegates if they wanted to and ditch Trump. But they won't, because they fear overturning the will of the voters would destroy their party. The same goes for the Democratic side, so superdelegates serve no purpose. Even in a scenario where superdelegates don't exist and Dems had the balls to do it, they could just unbind the delegates like some in the GOP are considering doing. There's no functional difference in having superdelegates and not having them, unless you enjoy the constant bitching about it every primary cycle. Do you really think 99.9% of people will care whether the will of the people was overturned by superdelegates or if the will of the people was overturned by the Rules Committee unbinding the delegates? The only part that will matter is "will of people overturned."
The clueless people (i.e some Bernie supporters, etc)  would find something else to complain about, methinks. It's not worth it placating them in this instance.

It's not just a Bernie thing though. There was much gnashing of teeth on all sides about them in 2008 as well.
Oh, I agree. But it's better for people to stop complaining about superdelegates than to get rid of them. It's not truly  proven that superdelegates are to blame for everything they are blamed for... It's an incorrect opinion held by the public, kind of like how some people think artificial colors in food is bad for some reason.
If people weren't complaining about superdelegates they would be complaining about something else.
Logged
Minnesota Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,969


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 04, 2016, 08:44:07 PM »

Yeah, look for Christine Pelosi to be a big player in Philadelphia on the rule changes.


Minnesota has already done it. There was some talk for Colorado and Maine. Hopefully we see the start of a trend.

Minnesota did not get rid of caucuses. They are now holding caucuses AND primaries because they are stupid.

The Delegates are bound by the Primary.

Most states have some sort of process to pick the actual delegates and for grass roots party organizing, that is what the caucuses will continue to be in Minnesota.

BTW I believe Maine has already approved a presidential primary for 2020 also.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 11 queries.