Pelosi Calls For Cut In Superdelegates In 2012

[Aloha Spirit]

"Nancy Pelosi, who will chair the Democratic National Convention, said Thursday she thinks the party should slash the number of so-called superdelegates for the 2012 presidential race....
“I think 800 is far too many,” said Pelosi, D-Calif.

Pelosi said she opposed the idea of superdelegates when they were created some three decades ago. She also ran a losing campaign for Democratic National Committee chair two decades ago, in which abolishing superdelegates was part of her platform.

“There should be some way to have some ex-oficio delegates, some elected leaders of the state parties and the rest,” she said. “They do the work of the party between conventions, but it shouldn’t be 700, 800 people. It should be some representation of the leadership of the party and of the congressional, gubernatorial and other manifestations of the party....”

“On June 3 the math will become clear,” she said, referring to the final day of state primaries and caucuses. “And we’ll have a nominee.”

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=news-000002882280

[Fresh_Start]

1. how about eliminating them entirely

make every vote across the country equal in value.
Not some citizens votes are worth 16,000 times as much as other citizens.

[DesertFlower]

12. agreed. nt

[rinsd]

27. Agreed. They serve little purpose.

Either they thwart the will of the voters by voting against the majority of the pledged delegates or they are a rubber stamp to the pledged delegates.

[Independent-Voter]

32. Ding! This superdelegate nonsense makes ya'll look like a banana republic

[Skwmom]

38. No. Without them the Clintons would have just focused on the pledged delegates who aren't

accountable to the people.

[Fresh_Start]

39. many of the superdelegates are accountable to no one

I don't believe your premise.

I say no superdelegates.
Pure popular vote.

[Freddie Stubbs]

53. The problem with that is

that ordinary people will have a tough time getting elected if they have to run against Congressmen, Senators, and Governors.

[Fresh_Start]

57. with or without superdelegates

ordinary people have tough time versus career politicians.

I'd think superdelegates would be more likely to vote for our of their cronies over someone unknown.

[Hippo_Tron]

66. When there were no superdelegates, Congressmen and Senators didn't run for delegate spots

Because they feared pissing off constituents who want the delegate spots. Many of those delegates contribute serious manpower and financial resources to their campaigns. They're not going to risk that to be a pledged delegate who has to vote for the person they're pledged to anyway.

[harun]

58. A primary is not a general election for lots of reasons

[ElboRuum]

62. Any of them good? n/t

[harun]

64. Depends on your point of view

It is staggered in terms of time to get supporters mobilized and motivated in different locales.

It is not all done at one time to vet out those will minimal support from the voters. Then later on in the race momentum is built for the front runner(s).

It is done with delegates and super-delegates who both can pick whoever they want because, like in the General Election we live in a representative republic, not a democracy.

We live in a representative republic because the general population is not smart enough to know what is best for them and vote too often with emotion and not with well researched and informed decisions.

I see nearly daily someone confuse the right to vote in the GE with the Primaries. The primaries have nothing to do with the right to vote. A political party can pick whoever they want to be their nominee in the GE, to their own peril. Now if you don't like it fine. Nothing is stopping anyone from simply writing in on the ballot the name of anyone they want in the GE.

[ElboRuum]

67. That's quite a load of assumptions there.

"We live in a representative republic because the general population is not smart enough to know what is best for them and vote too often with emotion and not with well researched and informed decisions."

And those doing the voting for us do?

"I see nearly daily someone confuse the right to vote in the GE with the Primaries."

Well, if you are a registered Democrat, following the rules, it's about as close to a right as you can get with it still being a privilege.

I categorically reject the idea of so-called "mob-rule" fearmongering, it is precisely this which elects the President by virtue of the electoral college rather than the popular vote, another thing that is way too long in the tooth. Maybe this COULD have been a valid reason for this form of election in the time of Constitutional ratification where only the wealthy could afford the type of education required to vote without emotion and with researched and informed decisions, as you put it.

And just because someone doesn't know something or "confuses" it as you say doesn't make them mentally deficient, it makes them ignorant of the facts. Ignorance can be corrected.

[Adelante]

2. 800 is too many nt

[Upton]

3. I think having even one is too many

the rules need to be revamped.

[gmudem]

4. Agreed

These SD's should not exist at all.

[OzarkDem]

5. With any luck

She'll be out of a job by then.

Nancy has been a miserable failure.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. Oh? Miserable failure?

Did she run for president and fail to win the nomination too?

[Aloha Spirit]

9. It's so gratifying when ignored says things that piss people off. Don't know why, just is.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. Oh, trust me...

He's the one that's really pissed off now.

[ElboRuum]

60. Hehehe...

I have no one on ignore, but I imagine if I did, I'd be trying to guess what Ignored said to piss people off. Then I'd take them off just to see how close I got.

[OzarkDem]

15. Yes, Pelosi is a miserable failure

and no, Clinton hasn't lost. In a straightforward, unrigged primary, she would have eliminated Obama a long time ago.

Check back 6 months or a year ago in DU to see how happy Dems have been with Pelosi's Bush a**kissing, Iraq War cheerleading and refusal to investigate Bushco crimes. Have you forgotten those things? Apparently another fair weather Dem.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

17. Clinton lost and McCain's gonna lose.

Get over it.

"Check back 6 months or a year ago in DU to see how happy Dems have been with Pelosi's Bush a**kissing, Iraq War cheerleading and refusal to investigate Bushco crimes."

Well, since you claim to be a Clinton supporter, it's not like you take those issues seriously either.

[OzarkDem]

24. Don't ask me for a donation

If McCain wins and the economy tanks.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. I wouldn't take money from you.

[cali]

25. sure Clinton's lost And at least Pelosi voted against the IWR

and she's never done any cheerleading for it- unlike hilly who voted for the IWR and really did support the war for years.

[Renew Deal]

26. You really hate Democrats don't you?

It's getting transparent.

[Mooney]

28. You finally said something I agree with!

The minute she said that impeachment was "off the table" I knew we had a loser on our hands.

[LakeSamish706]

7. How about revamping the entire Primary process? It sucks big time. n/t

[SeattleGirl]

8. I vote for NO super D's. n/t

[MattP]

10. Get rid of them

super delegates suck, a few of them have come out and said how much for my vote, and Haim Saban tried to bribe the Young Democrats for million

[jenmito]

11. “On June 3 the math will become clear...and we’ll have a nominee.”

Thank you!

[Ichingcarpenter]

18. That is the only thing that matters ... Pelosi will be gone by 2012

So who cares what she sees 4 years down the road?

[jenmito]

41. Yup. I think people are missing the headline here!

[Ichingcarpenter]

50. People miss a lot on purpose and for convenience

I was about to ask the OP to change the title earlier,
Although to his/her credit she did but that fact in bold letters

The only thing is important right now is what is happening in this election
not 4 years down the road. Pelosi better come through!

[jenmito]

51. I agree. I think that still SHOULD be in the title, though...

Maybe I should start a thread about it?

[Aloha Spirit]

52. I thought it was important to use the title to get people to read it!

I mean, from what I recall, Pelosi's June 3rd proclamation in itself is not news since she's said it several times before, but what's notable to me is *when* she says it.
She seems to come out and say it when people start to get carried away.
I see her as the referee who has to break up the discussion when people (Florida Voting Rights Act lawsuit) start acting up.

I also thought her mentioning that she wants to cut SD's was a way of hinting at the fact that SD's are the *only* reason this nomination is still alive.

[Ichingcarpenter]

65. Oh, you did good.....

I just thought it was good Pelosi reiterated that important point.

[K Gardner]

43. Lucy's holding the football again.. no thanks. Obviously NO ONE can stop the Clintons. I'll

believe it when I see it.

[high density]

13. Cut super delegates to zero. Cut the caucuses out as well and replace with primaries

Wrap up all the voting in a couple months, not five+ months.

[hokies4ever]

19. Some states need to do caucuses

because their parties can't afford to have two separate primaries. They have the caucuses early in order to have an impact on the national race. They have their primaries later because it gives voters more time to learn about the downticket people that they are voting for.

[high density]

29. We do that in Maine

But it is a bad system. We had our presidential caucus in February and it took me 4.5 hours to participate in it. That's about 27 times as long as it takes me to cast a vote in a normal election (10 minutes, which almost includes the walk from my house to my voting place.) Yeah I got to see people talk, and that was nice, but I wasn't there for speeches, I was there to cast a vote. Our primary for down ballot candidates is not until next month. It's simple, we just need to move our primary up to February. Down ballot candidates will have to start campaigning earlier.

[hokies4ever]

34. It will greatly affect your local offices though

I was under the impression that is the reason why states have the early caucus and then a primary instead of just moving the primary date up much earlier. After all, how much sense does it make to say, select a party representative for mayor in January when the election isn't until November?

[bluestateguy]

14. Superdelegates are a relic of the days of backroom deals and brokered conventions

They should be eliminated. I DO think, however, that it's OK for party bosses to be involved in writing the platforms. After all, they are the ones who have to translate those commitments into policy.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

20. Eliminate the superdelegates, eliminate the forced ordering of IA and NH first....

....all the things that gave us headaches this go around, just do us a favor and get rid of it.

[my3boyz]

21. Link? nt

[Aloha Spirit]

22. ...

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=news-000002882280

[my3boyz]

23. Thank you!!! nt

[nilram]

31. wow, now that's important!

Sorry, I have a hard time paying attention to Ms. "Impeachment is off the table" Pelosi.

[Aloha Spirit]

33. I have a hard time paying attention to you. sorry.

[nilram]

42. you seem to feel strongly about this

and I appreciate you bringing it to DU. I thought you were reporting a news story and wasn't directing my comment at you -- sorry if that wasn't clear.

My comment was directed towards Ms. Pelosi, the subject of the article. I don't think she stands up strongly enough for the Democratic party in the legislature, so I don't hold her opinion in high regard.

[MyNameGoesHere]

35. Get rid of entirely and go to winner take all. n/t

[Cha]

36. And no Rec'd for this thread..isn't this

Huge?

“On June 3 the math will become clear,” she said, referring to the final day of state primaries and caucuses. “And we’ll have a nominee.”

Looks huge to me..that and Obama will not have miss sybil on the ticket with him!

[Aloha Spirit]

40. Pelosi always comes off like a kindergarten teacher trying to settle down the kiddies.

Whenever people start getting worked up, she shuts them down.
I suspect this reiteration of the June 3rd end date was in response to the lawsuit.

[Zachstar]

37. Coward

You duck away from needing to endorse to end this madness and you tout that load of BS about June 3 being the end.

So what are you going to do when she appeals the decision and goes to the convention idiot!

[David__77]

44. No superdelegates would be best.

And a single, national primary (maybe phased over a couple weeks) would be best of all.

[MattNC]

45. Madam Speaker

the math is "clear" now.

[invictus]

46. Superdelegates should be ABOLISHED completely! n/t

[Stephanie]

47. I totally agree.

It's outrageous, and I bet most of us never knew they existed until this season.

[Aloha Spirit]

48. It's like ChrisRock says, nobody hears of superdelegates until the black guy looks like a winner.

[Barack_America]

49. Get rid of most of the party-insider superdelegates...

Keep the elected officials as superdelegates.

That way we reduce their numbers and keep them accountable.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

54. Then donations from PACs are limited to the FEC campaign maximums

That would be good.

Still, I'd like to see the SDs them eliminated all together. You know, in a perfect world kind of way.

[Jim Lane]

63. I agree with this intermediate solution

Most of the superdelegates are party officials who are chosen through arcane processes, remote from the vast majority of voters. They shouldn't have automatic votes at the Convention.

Senators, Congressmembers, and Governors, however, won actual public elections. They're reasonably representative and reasonably accountable. There's the additional issue that if they aren't delegates automatically, they'll run for regular slots and make it harder for rank-and-filers to become delegates.

I'd also include another of the current categories of supers -- all current and former Democratic Presidents and Vice Presidents. I'm very unhappy about some of the things Bill Clinton has done this year, but, c'mon, the man won two national elections for us. He and Carter, Mondale, and Gore deserve to have a bit more say in the nominating process.

[ClayZ]

55. She ought to be focusing on NOW!

K and R

[RichardRay]

56. Don't eliminate them entirely unless you do something about the

problem they were invented to solve. They may not be a great solution, but the problem was real.

[ElboRuum]

59. Superdelegates make little sense...

...in the democratic process. I mean, I understand that the party wants to have the best nominee, and theoretically, the superdelegates could conceivably go against the people's will, but I doubt they could do it without de facto dissolving the party.

Math becoming clear? Nancy, the math IS clear. Math is ALWAYS clear. It only seems unclear to people who don't understand it or who choose to ignore it.

[Aloha Spirit]

61. I agree. I think SD's are valuable when they help to decide an inevitable decision, but I think it's

interesting that Pelosi brought up her dislike of SD's NOW, I interpreted it as her drawing attention to the fact that Barack would already have won if it weren't for the SD's.