Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Will Super Delegates Determine the Democratic Nominee?

Posted by Chris Bowers, Open Left at 5:03 AM on February 5, 2008.


Unless either Obama or Clinton drops out before the convention, there's no way that the nominee can be determined without the super delegates.
061128clintonobamahmed5phmedium.thumbnail
Obama | Clinton

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Democracy and Elections in your
mailbox!

 

It can no longer be avoided: super delegates will determine the Democratic Presidential nominee this year. Here is the current situation:

* With Michigan and Florida removed from the equation, 2,025 delegates are required to win the nomination, and there are 3,253 pledged delegates.
* To date, four states with a combined 137 pledged delegates have held nominating contests.
* Currently, Barack Obama is projected with 63 pledged delegates, and Hillary Clinton is projected with 48 (source).
* On Super Tuesday, 22 states and a couple territories with a combined 1,688 pledged delegates will hold nominating contests.

From this point, quick math shows that after Super Tuesday, only 1,428 pledged delegates will still be available. Now, here is where the problem shows up. According to current polling averages, the largest possible victory for either candidate on Super Tuesday will be Clinton 889 pledged delegates, to 799 pledged delegates for Obama. (In all likelihood, the winning margin will be lower than this, but using these numbers helps emphasize the seriousness of the situation.) As such, the largest possible pledged delegate margin Clinton can have after Super Tuesday is 937 to 862. (While it is possible Obama will lead in pledged delegates after Super Tuesday, it does not currently seem possible for Obama to have a larger lead than 75). That leaves Clinton 1,088 pledged delegates from clinching the nomination, with only 1,428 pledged delegates remaining. Thus, in order to win the nomination without the aid of super delegates, in her best-case scenario after Super Tuesday, Clinton would need to win 76.2% of all remaining pledged delegates. Given our proportional delegate system, there is simply no way that is going to happen unless Obama drops out.

So, there you have it. Unless either Obama or Clinton drops out before the convention, there is simply no way that the nominee can be determined without the super delegates. In the broadest definition of the term, "a brokered convention" is a convention that is determined by super delegates instead of nominating contests. Through a deadly combination of a primary calendar race to the bottom and an anachronistic method of delegate selection, we Democrats seem to have already arrived at that point. Short of one candidate dropping out, there is simply no easy way that this situation can be resolved. Given that Michigan and Florida combine for 313 pledged delegates, it is likely that this situation won't be resolved without severe bureaucratic fighting on the DNC rules and by-laws committee, or even a credential fight at the convention itself.

And why should either candidate drop out? Clinton has a large lead in super delegates, and can make a real argument over the Michigan and Florida delegations. Obama, by contrast, will probably lead in pledged delegates at the end of February, and will be able to raise significantly more money than Clinton. And so, we are at an impasse.

My instincts tell me this is a complete disaster, since it will shine light on complicated bylaws and the questionable democratic nature of the delegate selection process instead of on voters. As fascinating as it might be for political junkies, it is not the kind of image Democrats need. We need to figure a way out of this situation in a hurry.

Update: After some thought, the best solution I can come up with is to get a majority of super delegates to pledge to support whoever wins the majority of pledged delegates following the final primaries and caucuses in early June. To resolve the Michigan and Florida situations, simply allocate Florida's delegates as they would have been allocated according to the primary vote there. In the case of Michigan, do the same thing, except allocate according to the exit poll results that show how people would have voted if Obama had been on the ballot.

Our options are not pretty, but that would be better than letting bylaws and super delegates determine the nominee instead of voters. Hopefully, either Clinton or Obama will run up a long list of wins, and the other candidate will drop out. Failing that, hopefully the super delegates will line-up behind whoever has the most popular support and pledged delegates. Failing both, we could be facing a crisis in the party where the nominee lacks legitimacy in the opinion of the rank and file.

Digg!

Tagged as: clinton, obama, democratic party, super delegates

Chris Bowers was a full-time editor at MyDD from May 2004 until June 2007. Some of his projects have included the creation of the Liberal Blog Advertising Network, the first scientifically random poll of progressive netroots activists, the Use It Or Lose It campaign, the nation's most accurate forecast of Democratic house pickups in 2006, and the 2006 Googlebomb the Elections campaign.


Democratic Senators: Franken Won't Be Seated with New Class
Fallout from the surreal political scandal in Illinois has now wafted into Minnesota.
Post by Sam Stein and Ryan Grim. January 6, 2009.
Update: Al Franken Declared Winner; Coleman's Options Dwindle
"Today, the Supreme Court once again affirmed the validity of the rules under which this recount was conducted."
Post by Steve Benen. January 5, 2009.
Franken Winning Vast Majority of Wrongly Rejected Absentee Ballots
Norm Coleman's lawyers tried to stop the counting of hundreds of wrongly rejected absentee ballots and now we know they had good reason.
Post by tremayne. January 3, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Remember the DNC in 1968?
Posted by: curiousdwk on Feb 5, 2008 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most people who think of the DNC in 1968 remember the police riots against the protesters and think it was all about being against Viet Nam. It wasn't. It was about the non-democratic process of the Democratic party in selecting the victor. The party bosses (Daley, et al) were going to coronate Humphrey even though Humphrey hadn't won one single primary. In each primary, an anti-war candidate won (such as Bobby Kennedy) so it was demonstrated that the voters wanted an anti-Viet Nam candidate. But the "process" didn't care what the voters wanted. The "leaders" were going to choose and didn't give a damn about all the voting in all the primaries. The demonstrators were demonstrating because of the process - not just the war. We have perfected the scenario of having the vote but not the voice.

Sounds like we've gone full cycle here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it too late...?
Posted by: Artaraxl on Feb 5, 2008 8:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...to Draft Gore?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deb
Posted by: debmcd on Feb 5, 2008 11:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about getting rid of this stupid system altogether. It should be one voter equals one vote. Let the voters decide who they want for president. All this delegate crap is just clouding up the issue. This is an election to determin who this country wants to govern for the next four years. Having some elected super delegate is just plain stupid. The whold vote system we have is just plain stupid. If they can count our individual votes to determin delegates, they sure as hell can count our individual votes for president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Deb Posted by: Basenjis
Truth is...
Posted by: Quannah on Feb 5, 2008 1:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
they will NEVER change the system because it would put their jobs (and their power) in jeopardy. If it truly were a system of "one person, one vote," they are well aware that it would spell the end of their political careers! Especially this year. People are fed up, but what does it matter? The "Powers-that-be" decide and they will keep it that way.

I can't see a way out of this. And it's unbelievable.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Only One Answer
Posted by: global_butterfly on Feb 6, 2008 2:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can only think of one solution to this controversy. Registered Democrats and Independent voters need to contact the Democratic National Committee and tell them that if the SuperDelegate votes are counted at the convention and the delegates from Florida and Michigan are not seated then We, the voters, will boycott the November general election.

If the DNC is convinced that Democrats will stay away from the polls in droves and the White House will be given to the GOP they MAY, and I emphasize MAY, come to their senses.


Mailing Address:
Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, DC 20003

Main Phone Number:
202-863-8000
(For questions about contributions, please call 877-336-7200)

Email the DNC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Michigan Exit Polls? You've got to be joking.
Posted by: marksf on Feb 8, 2008 10:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
--> As has become clear, the polls are absurdly inaccurate in this race.
--> This also discounts the absentee voters
--> Turnout at the polls & name recognition for 'uncommitted'? You've got to be kidding.

Just the fact Clinton managed to be the sole candidate on the ballot makes Michigan is extremely tainted. If it puts Clinton over the top, the nomination will be perceived as illegitimate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why the Dog and Pony Show?
Posted by: Babygoat on Feb 11, 2008 8:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why spend the lavish amounts of money-the time and effort, least of all major media not reporting anything but the political caucas'? It seems no more than a dog and pony show! If in fact, a hand full of people are allowed to "NOT REPRESENT THE PEOPLE" WHY ALL OF THE WASTE? How do we get past this? Who's bright idea was it anyway?
I know that I don't offer answers but I am hoping people smarter than I am will consider my questions and possibly TRY to do something about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]