HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Tim Kaine calls for elimi...

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:08 PM

 

Tim Kaine calls for eliminating superdelegates

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/15/tim-kaine-end-superdelegates-244944

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine is urging the Democratic National Committee to end its tradition of using superdelegates, which activists say diminish the influence of regular voters at the expense of party bigwigs in the presidential nominating process.

"I have long believed there should be no superdelegates. These positions are given undue influence in the popular nominating contest and make the process less democratic,” Kaine wrote in a letter Wednesday to DNC chairman Tom Perez, according to a copy obtained by POLITICO.

The plea from Kaine — himself a former DNC chairman, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 running mate, and a superdelegate — puts him on the side of many backers of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s primary opponent in last year’s race for the White House. Under the current system, elected officials and influential party members get to cast a vote for their preferred presidential candidate with extra weight, regardless of how their state or district votes during the primary.

Pointing to the ongoing work of the Unity Reform Commission appointed last year to review and change the DNC’s nominating process, Kaine urged the group to recommend doing away with the superdelegate system altogether, and by extension encouraged Perez to adopt that proposal.


Story continues...

27 replies, 4254 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 27 replies Author Time Post
Reply Tim Kaine calls for eliminating superdelegates (Original post)
HerbChestnut Nov 2017 OP
Me. Nov 2017 #1
OnDoutside Nov 2017 #4
FarCenter Nov 2017 #9
meow2u3 Nov 2017 #2
OnDoutside Nov 2017 #5
Jim Lane Nov 2017 #6
leftofcool Nov 2017 #12
oasis Nov 2017 #16
jmowreader Nov 2017 #21
whopis01 Nov 2017 #25
greeny2323 Nov 2017 #3
uponit7771 Nov 2017 #7
StevieM Nov 2017 #8
StevieM Nov 2017 #10
jalan48 Nov 2017 #11
whopis01 Nov 2017 #26
demmiblue Nov 2017 #13
Sienna86 Nov 2017 #14
marble falls Nov 2017 #15
former9thward Nov 2017 #19
marble falls Nov 2017 #20
former9thward Nov 2017 #24
Gore1FL Nov 2017 #17
PatsFan87 Nov 2017 #18
TomCADem Nov 2017 #22
Raine Nov 2017 #23
Not Ruth Nov 2017 #27

Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:11 PM

1. If The Cons Had Supers

I wonder if they would've been stuck with trump

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:18 PM

4. I remember them being jealous of the Dems superdelegates.

Reckoned they could have stopped Trump if they had them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:40 PM

9. I think it is dangerous to eliminate all superdelegates for that reason

 

However, each state should have a number proportional to the number of registered Democrats in that state, and the superdelegates must be chosen from elected state and federal officeholders, rather than people in various party positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:16 PM

2. I'll accept the need to eliminate superdelegates

provided only Democrats get to run in Democratic primaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:19 PM

5. Good point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:32 PM

6. The Democratic Party doesn't control that.

 

I don't think the party should defer improving its rules until 50+ legislatures have amended their ballot access laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:44 PM

12. Yes, excellent!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 09:51 PM

16. Bona fide Dems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 12:30 AM

21. They need to have won at least one election as a Democrat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 07:36 PM

25. Fair enough in my opinion. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:17 PM

3. I'd be OK with them gone

 

There are good reasons to have superdelegates, but I'd be fine if they were removed. The standard person on the street, I think, views them negatively so it would be a decent PR move to get rid of them.

And it would end the constant nagging about them, which is so tiring to listen to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:35 PM

7. If they can come up with system that can keep a Red Don running for head of dem party then yeah

... but if not then hell naw.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:40 PM

8. The point to getting rid of SDs is to validate an absurd narrative about 2016 and pretend that they

were ever going to be used to deny Bernie Sanders the nomination.

Bernie was the one who tried to get the SDs to give him the nomination, in spite of a 12 point loss.

It was already established in 2008 that HRC would never win the nomination that way when the SDs went for Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:41 PM

10. An interesting alternative would be the make the SDs winner-take-all delegates, by state. (eom)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:43 PM

11. I think super delegates are a bit like the Electoral College. Popular vote doesn't count 100%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #11)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 07:37 PM

26. Exactly. Not truly Democratic. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 08:45 PM

13. Thank you, Senator Kaine. The existence of superdelegates is undemocratic.

Especially when they pledge their allegiance/vote to a candidate before the official nomination of our candidate.

Also, get rid of caucuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 09:45 PM

14. Wonderful.

Now, we need more Democrats to join in on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 09:48 PM

15. That alone would go a long way to reform the process. Super delegates were a necessary evil in ...

the sixties to guarantee PoC a chance to be represented at the convention, but this purpose has been subverted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #15)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 12:09 AM

19. Superdelegates did not exist in the 60s

They were an invention to try and correct the electoral disasters of the 1972 and 1980 elections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 12:15 AM

20. From wikipedia

Origins

After the 1968 Democratic National Convention, at which pro-Vietnam War liberal Hubert Humphrey was nominated for the presidency despite not running in a single primary election, the Democratic Party made changes in its delegate selection process to correct what was seen as "illusory" control of the nomination process by primary voters.[12] A commission headed by South Dakota Senator George McGovern and Minnesota Representative Donald M. Fraser met in 1969 and 1970 to make the composition of the Democratic Party's nominating convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast in primary elections.

The rules implemented by the McGovern-Fraser Commission shifted the balance of power to primary elections and caucuses, mandating that all delegates be chosen via mechanisms open to all party members.[12] As a result of this change the number of primaries more than doubled over the next three presidential election cycles, from 17 in 1968 to 35 in 1980.[12] Despite the radically increased level of primary participation, with 32 million voters taking part in the selection process by 1980, the Democrats proved largely unsuccessful at the ballot box, with the 1972 presidential campaign of McGovern and the 1980 re-election campaign of Jimmy Carter resulting in landslide defeats.[12] Democratic Party affiliation skidded from 41 percent of the electorate at the time of the McGovern-Fraser Commission report to just 31 percent in the aftermath of the 1980 electoral debacle.[12]

Further soul-searching took place among party leaders, who argued that the pendulum had swung too far in the direction of primary elections over insider decision-making, with one May 1981 California white paper declaring that the Democratic Party had "lost its leadership, collective vision and ties with the past," resulting in the nomination of unelectable candidates.[13] A new 70-member commission headed by Governor of North Carolina Jim Hunt was appointed to further refine the Democratic Party's nomination process, attempting to balance the wishes of rank-and-file Democrats with the collective wisdom of party leaders and to thereby avoid the nomination of insurgent candidates exemplified by the liberal McGovern or the anti-Washington conservative Carter and lessening the potential influence of single-issue politics in the selection process.[13]

Following a series of meetings held from August 1981 to February 1982, the Hunt Commission issued a report which recommended the set aside of unelected and unpledged delegate slots for Democratic members of Congress and for state party chairs and vice chairs (so-called "superdelegates".[13] With the original Hunt plan, superdelegates were to represent 30% of all delegates to the national convention, but when it was finally implemented by the Democratic National Committee for the 1984 election, the number of superdelegates was set 14%. Over time this percentage has gradually increased, until by 2008 the percentage stands at approximately 20% of total delegates to the Democratic Party nominating convention.[14]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #20)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 11:21 AM

24. Thanks. Exactly what I said.

Super Delegates did not exist in the 60s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 10:41 PM

17. I don't have a specific issue with superdelegates as a concept.

There is a useful purpose for having state delegate seats for elected membership and party officials outside of the normal delegate selection process. The issue I see is that their are simply too many of them and their endorsements count in the delegate totals far too early in the game.

So have superdelegates, but:
1> have less,
2> select who will actually gets the seats after the state's caucus/primary is held, and
3> there needs to be some sort mitigation process to keep the process honest and the party unified in the off-chance, the superdelegates actually change the nominee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 12:07 AM

18. Eliminate superdelegates, eliminate caucuses, eliminate the extremely early registration dates

in states like New York.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 01:00 AM

22. I Am In Favor of Eliminating Superdelegates if We Get Rid of Caucuses...

...at least for large top 25 states. I can understand a caucus in a small state, but a large state? That just disenfranchises Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 04:58 AM

23. Get rid of them

the Democratic party needs to be democratic and not controlled by the elites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Thu Nov 16, 2017, 07:44 PM

27. I would like a rule by which the delegates get one chance, no decision, default to popular vote

 

Everyone has a chance, everyone wins,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread