Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: The Congressional Black Caucus objects to eliminating super delegates. Why? [View all]HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)48. 'plenty of people'....
your 'plenty of people' are establishment DEMs
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/news/news-archive/history-of-superdelegates
OR this one
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/04/democratic-superdelegates-how-the-party-learned-to-start-worrying-and-fear-its-voters.html
That puts the SDs in the proper context if you do not like the other link I replied with
Consider this... why did SDs pledge BEFORE a single primary vote was cast? that goes directly against your premise here: 'I don't think any SDs would overturn the wishes of the majority of Dems'
It's 'broke' and it does need to be 'fixed'
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
86 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Congressional Black Caucus objects to eliminating super delegates. Why? [View all]
pnwmom
Jun 2016
OP
If the Washington SD's were proportionally split I might be inclined to agree
Scootaloo
Jun 2016
#51
Superdelegates look less like "America" and more like a Beverly Hills / Hamptons mixer
Scootaloo
Jun 2016
#46
I think that the full list of superdelegates proves such disagreement quite meaningless
Scootaloo
Jun 2016
#57
it concerns the larger context of what the CBC is considered by many within DEM party...
HumanityExperiment
Jun 2016
#23
Exactly. Watch the Repubs come up with a SD system after their epic Trump loses of 2016.
FSogol
Jun 2016
#80
It was interesting to me reading that article. It reminded me of the Film on HBO: *All The Way*
Raine1967
Jun 2016
#17
Well, 1 is better than none. And adding the 43 ensures that there will be at least
pnwmom
Jun 2016
#22
They're not representing the entire country. They're representing Democrats.
TwilightZone
Jun 2016
#37
Not sure I understand your point - if the establishment is less diverse than the electorate, then
Chathamization
Jun 2016
#34
If we had the electorate decide (no supers), we would have a more diverse and representative group
Chathamization
Jun 2016
#41
We have about 20% AA delegates now, compared to 22% of Dems -- INCLUDING super delegates.
pnwmom
Jun 2016
#43
Removing superdelegates means the electorate would make the decision. And 22% is higher than 20%.
Chathamization
Jun 2016
#45
The CBC is comprised of incumbents; superdelegates protect incumbents from grassroots activists.
Vote2016
Jun 2016
#39
Gee, the DNC has put some effort into increasing outreach to create more LGBT delegates because
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2016
#81
I'm not sure that this system leads to greater representation for African Americans.
David__77
Jun 2016
#62
I think that African Americans might comprise <26% of senators/house members.
David__77
Jun 2016
#66
Because super delegates are less diverse than the body of regular delegates
TheKentuckian
Jun 2016
#83
I have less of a problem with superdelegates than I do with their vast number.
John Poet
Jun 2016
#68
More importantly they object to "open primaries." This is their main gripe with BS
glennward
Jun 2016
#73