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

The Super Delegate Wiki-Watchdog: Find Out What's Really Happening in '08 Race

Posted by Jennifer Nix, The Literary Outpost at 10:43 AM on February 6, 2008.


This situation calls for some immediate action and collaboration-to drive a stake of transparency into the heart of this beast-of-a-process.
sobamaclintonlarge
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 PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

A quick tour around the blogs and media sites this morning is confirming that Clinton and Obama are still neck and neck in the pledged delegates race after yesterday's 24 primaries and caucuses. This means the prediction of a "brokered convention of the worst sort" is likely what we've got coming down the pike. And it also brings up that murky business of the super-delegates, those "party professionals" who have the power to legitimize the will of rank-and-file voters, or to flout it.

Chris Bowers warned Monday that unless either Clinton or Obama drop out of the nomination race, it's pretty much a given that super-delegates are going to pick our Democratic nominee.

"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."

(By the way, for those of us in need of a quick overview of how the super-delegate process works, here's one of the best I have found.)

The delegate count from Super Tuesday is not yet fixed, but Bowers' prediction is looking fairly spot-on at this point-even if the race is significantly tighter than his proposed scenario on Monday. So, what we have here, friends, is a potential FUBAR. What will those pesky super-delegates do?

We need to pressure the super-delegates to be accountable to the will of the people-not to a party machine or political favors. And, frankly, not to pundits caught up in a love fest either. Our next President should be elected BY THE PEOPLE.

Such a situation calls for some immediate action and collaboration-to drive a stake of transparency into the heart of this beast-of-a-process. The Outpost's Mark Myers has an idea, which could build on the efforts of OpenLeft and DemConventionWatch. And we could use your help to flesh it out. Here's the LO-down:

We're setting up a Super-Delegate Wiki-Watchdog, to centralize the effort of collecting the raw data about super-delegates, who they are committed to and how people in their region voted in the primary. So, as the convention approaches and the situation comes into sharper focus, we will be in a position to call on real data rather than hypotheticals to highlight this issue.

There will likely be uses for the data that we haven't thought of yet. But here are the uses that Mark currently envisions:

1) Openly track which elected officials are effectively canceling out the will of their constituents. All Dems in the House are super-delegates and have a vote. So the voters deserve to know if their elected official has canceled out their voice. For instance if a congressional district goes for Obama 3:1 but the S-D from that district backs Clinton.

2) Track the impact of the party officials who are given S-D votes.

3) At a national level, calculate the net impact of the S-Ds. For instance, what is the percentage of votes/regular delegates/super-delegates for each candidate and what are the differences between those delegates. (DemConWatch hints at this but it doesn't really give the numbers-however the data on DemConWatch will be invaluable in terms of building out the table.)

4) Provide some means of summarizing this data so we can get it out into the hands of journalists and bloggers so that voters have visibility regarding the impacts. (This is not there now, since we need the raw data first).

5) The other thing that could be really ironic here is that Democratic voters in Republican controlled congressional districts could be better represented at the convention simply because they *don't* have SD coming from their area. Possibly something we could measure.

Clearly, we'll need a lot of co-conspirators to make this baby fly. Jump into the comments and let us know what you think about how this might best work. And if you want to get involved, make your intentions and email contact known and we'll get right back to you. Spread the word to other folks you think may want to get involved, too. Onward!

[Note: We've just launched this blog today, and are encountering some of the glitch "fun" of Wordpress. So, apologies if a few technical matters are suspect. We're working on it!]

Digg!

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

A former National Public Radio producer (”On the Media”) and staff writer for Variety, Jen’s also written for New York, The New York Observer, The Nation, Village Voice, National Law Journal, Salon, AlterNet, FireDogLake, DailyKos and other media outlets and blogs


Report: Obama Prepared to Talk to Hamas
Barack Obama is reportedly planning to ditch President Bush's strategy of isolating Hamas, and will instead move to open contacts with the group.
Post by Faiz Shakir. January 8, 2009.
Obama Can Learn from Bush: 'We Tried' Ain't Enough
We will need to remind Obama again and again that for those voters concerned about immigration, 'almost' just ain't gonna cut it come 2012.
Post by Paco Fabian. January 8, 2009.
Rachel Maddow on 'Daily Show': 'Insulted,' 'Embarrassed' By Bush
Jon Stewart and Maddow talk Bush, Obama, Bill Clinton, MSNBC and the Munsters.
Post by Danny Shea. January 8, 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:
Let's get rid of "super delegates"
Posted by: jpopphan@charter.net on Feb 6, 2008 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was a bit shocked when I realized just how many delegates are set aside for the so-called "super" delegates. There are far too many on the Democratic side, and I think that it is time to get rid of them altogether.

We cannot have a participatory democracy if there are party leaders who leverage as much political influence as do thousands of regular voters. This is particularly a concern when/if the "super" delegates cast their votes contrary to the choice of the electorate.

This is not the Soviet Union and we are not the Communist Party. We don't need party leaders to validate our choices or prevent us from making a "bad" choice. The time for real democracy is now.

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

Super delegates negate the will of the rank-and-file
Posted by: truthteller on Feb 6, 2008 1:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This "super delegate" system was instituted by the Democratic Party after the '72 election, when George McGovern was defeated in 49 states by the Nixon dirty-tricks campaign. The first dirty trick was sabotaging then-frontrunner Ed Muskie's campaign in NH with the Courthouse steps crying incident. Nixon's people wanted McGovern to be the nominee as the perceived weakest opponent to Nixon. (And, BTW, I dare someone to tell me about what any major issue in the campaign the great Sen. McGovern was wrong on.)

Anyway, after '72, the establishment Dems. decided to put gaining office ahead of representative democracy, and instituted this system to prevent a true "people's candidate" from winning the Presidential nomination. So we get candidates like Walter Mondale and Al Gore, who will do nothing to bring about real, structural change in this Country.

This system is full of rot and the leaders of it need to be brought down and the whole thing taken over by a new group of true citizen activists, not beholden to any corporate special interests. The only way this is going to happen is to not reward the current system. This means not voting for the same old, same old people. Make your protest known. Voting for someone you don't like and having them win is in some ways worse than the opposition winning. Vote for the Green Party candidate to register your disapproval for the lack of choice you've been given. The only way to dislodge these DLC corporatists is to have them lose office and power. Then we can install true progressives in the Democratic Party leadership.

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

LiveFree
Posted by: LiveFree on Feb 7, 2008 5:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Aren't super delegates mostly elected public officials? If most of them are elected by rank and file voters then super delegates already represent the will of the people through election and/or reelection.
Democracy by itself is a bad thing because it forces decision-making to conform to momentary popular opinion. Think about what happened to Al Gore when he ran his presidential campaign by opinion polls. As JFK wrote, sometimes elected representatives have to make decisions that oppose how voters back home feel about an issue (due to long-term considerations for thinking of "their best interests").
One of the major problems about the democratization of Congress over the past 30 years has been the intrusive public participation in deliberative committee meetings by lobbyists bent on influencing congressional decisions to benefit special interests. The effort to better serve the will of the people was perverted to a point where in recent years lobbyists have been allowed to write their own legislation.
Primaries have weakened the power of political parties in selecting presidential nominees because, until this time around, mostly activist Democrats and Republicans participated in the voting. Most rank and file Democrats and Republicans were better represented through local precinct captains when the parties directly selected nominees at the conventions.
Look back to the New Hampshire primary to see how opinion polls and national media had chosen Senator Barack Obama to win but the voters themselves chose Senator Hillary Clinton (by three percentage points). Much of Clinton's margin of victory was due to women deciding a day or two before voting to support her - after a display of emotion by the candidate showed a personal commitment to presidential ambition. And then again, Independents and some Republicans participating in the Democratic balloting in New Hampshire voted only to influence who would be the winner.
This presidential season is different from the past because voters have a more definite choice to make from remaining candidates - so the "hurry up" primaries and caucuses have not succeeded in selecting nominees early on - as popular opinion argued all of last year.

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

History repeats itself again...
Posted by: djnoll on Feb 7, 2008 6:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Federalists who framed our Constitution believed that the average American citizen was too poorly educated or too self-involved to be effective participants in their own governance and so our government was framed to give us a strong central government. They believed that only the wealthy elite should be placed in a position to rule the new country. This attitude of wealthy politicos has not changed in over 200 years!

Super-Delegates are now going to determine who will be the Democratic nominee? Well, we know how that will go, don't we? Howard Dean has made no bones about wanting Hillary as the nominee, despite all the negatives that woman has about her and the way the Republicans will tear her apart on the campaign trail with such things as Whitewater and her stand on immigration. The American people do not like her for this job, she has been too unwilling to take responsibility for her actions and we have had enough of that kind of governance.

If we had any doubt that the will of the American people is being killed by the parties, this is living proof. So, stop fixating on who will be president and start loading up your congress with Independents who can control whoever is elected and be veto-proof. It will be the only way to regain control of our government from the corporate controlled parties and their elitist super-delegates (many of whom will be up for election themselves this year).

http://www.standanddeliveramerica.com

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

Brokered Convention is Democracy in Action
Posted by: odcherenow on Feb 7, 2008 6:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't wait for the return of the Brokered Convention. Remember picking Jack Kennedy in '60 or Roosevelt in '34? '68 got messy as hell, because big ideas were trying to surface....end a bad war, give women their rights. The '70's were a massive reaction to these emerging ideas. Yet, all of these brokered conventions were great examples of democracy in action.

For those of us who did not have the opportunity to take the required Civics Course that taught us the ways and means of the US vision of democracy in HS (ruled out by Reagan in '82) a brokered convention is one in which the selected representatives of the party, both at the precinct level in caucuses now being held and those elected at state levels within the recent terms of office, choose the candidate THE PARTY wants to get behind. Like the older people in the neighborhood (when we still had them) who know the real leaders in the crowd coming up, eg. the kid with the best character and follow-through, 'cause they watched them growing up, the Party Faithfuls know what's do-able on getting their nominee elected. We'll have our chance on election day in November. This is democracy working and the Democratic Party is living proof of it's survival and good health. Don't tie a Populist Gag around the collective expression of our democracy.

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

DNC of 1968 Repeats Itself?
Posted by: curiousdwk on Feb 7, 2008 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The protests and the police riots of Chicago's 1968 DNC was not about the Viet Nam War as much as it was about the un-democratic process of the Democratic party. In every state that had had a primary, an anti-war person won (Bobby Kennedy, etc.). Yet the Democratic Party leaders were going to coronate Humphrey - a pro-war candidate. They were thumbing their noses (via their social fingers) at all of the preceding primary elections. Will today's Democratic leaders (e.g. Super-Delegates) feel free to do the same? Let's hope not. (But hopefully, we can do more than hope.)

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

super D's
Posted by: mama7 on Feb 7, 2008 9:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why can't the DNC simply rule that they will abide by the popular vote in favor of using super delegates? They could also rule to seat the delegates from MI and FL, except that these states did not have many names to vote on...........especially in MI where the only Dems. on the ballot were Dennis Kucinich and Hillary Clinton. Being from MI I already feel disenfranchised.

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

popular vote
Posted by: lionsdenmother on Feb 7, 2008 12:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
he who gets the most votes wins not he who gets the most delegates. thats how democracy should work

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

Change it for the next election - not because your guy may lose
Posted by: gabbyone on Feb 7, 2008 1:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ask Gary Hart about the superdelegates. He lost the nomination to Mondale for the Presidency because of this. You can't change it now because it may hurt your candidate....its the rules. Just like the
electoral college. If you don't like it work to change it after the election.

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

So where is the petition to sign?
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Feb 7, 2008 10:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What is there to actually DO?

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

Don't dis McGovern
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Feb 7, 2008 11:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If McGovern hadn't been the candidate, we would
still be fighting in Viet Nam.

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

Protest the super delegates
Posted by: bloosqr on Feb 12, 2008 11:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The issue of super delegates and the democratic party is unconscionable. Currently Obama is ahead in the popular vote and behind in the delegate vote. We can not have 800 party insiders decide the primaries for us! I have created a protest page here

http://www.popularprimaryvotenow.com

If you think this is an issue please add a comment to the protest page of the website. I will print out all the comments and give them to the Democratic party

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