Super Delegates don't actually vote?!?!?

[Nictuku]

This is from a blog, so I can't vouch for its credibility, and I admit that I SHOULD know the answer to this question as a responsible voting citizen (meaning I take time to look into things before arriving at an opinion).

But if it is true, then we have all been fed a lot of bullcrap recently (I'm shocked, shocked)....

Can anyone here elaborate on this? Is it the actual truth, or is it, too, being shaded by opinion?

From the article at the link below:

Super delegates would only vote to break an otherwise hopeless deadlock. They are a last resort and most importantly as mentioned earlier, super delegates have never -- repeat never in the history of the Democratic party ever cast even a single vote. Never. And if that hopeless deadlock never occurs super delegates will have no role. To count them now is pure fraud.

http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/2016/02/hillary-clintons-super-delegate-lies.html

If it is true, I swear that I think it is truly time to turn off the damn TV, because in most of the so called news programs I've seen, they are adding these superdelegate votes to Hillary's total delegate count, and that is out right propaganda.

[hillarysong2016]

1. thanks and another website with article debunking is

After Sanders' Big Win in New Hampshire, Establishment Figures Want to Scare You with Superdelegates. Here's Why It's Bullshit
By Shane Ryan | February 10, 2016 | 2:25pm


http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/02/after-sanders-big-win-in-new-hampshire-establishme.html

[Nictuku]

11. Very good article!

Thank you for posting.

[Mbrow]

2. this is from WIKI

In American politics, a "superdelegate" is a delegate to the Democratic National Convention that is seated automatically and chooses whom they want to vote for. These Democratic Party superdelegates include distinguished party leaders and elected officials, including all Democratic members of the House and Senate and sitting Democratic governors. Other superdelegates are chosen during the primary season. Democratic superdelegates are free to support any candidate for the nomination. This contrasts with convention "pledged" delegates that are selected based on the party primaries and caucuses in each U.S. state, in which voters choose among candidates for the party's presidential nomination. Because they are free to support anyone they want, superdelegates could potentially swing the results to nominate a presidential candidate that did not receive the majority of votes during the primaries.

At least in name, superdelegates are not involved in the the Republican Party nomination process. There are delegates to the Republican National Convention that are seated automatically, but they are limited to three per each state, consisting of the state chairsperson and two district-level committee members. Republican Party superdelegates are obliged to vote for their state's popular vote winner under the rules of the party branch to which they belong.[1]

Although the term super delegate was originally coined and created to describe a type of Democratic delegate, the term has become widely used to describe these delegates in both parties,[2] even though it is not an official term used by either party.

It looks as if they vote by this article, I'll dig some more

[klook]

3. Yet the number of Superdelegates Clinton has lined up to support her is constantly touted

as a reason for Sanders and his supporters to surrender to the inevitable.

Simultaneously, we're told that if we question the need for Superdelegates, obviously we are unicorn-chasing neophytes with no clue as to how all this actually works -- and, by the way, the Superdelegates would never overturn the will of the voters, so they're really insignificant anyway -- but also by the way, Hillary has a shitload of them lined up to support her, so just get real and give up already, will you?

Curious, isn't it?

[Mbrow]

4. from infoplease

"In some presidential elections, superdelegates can play a major role in determining the Democratic nominee. Unlike delegates, superdelegates are not bound to represent the popular vote of a region at the Democratic National Convention; they are free to support any candidate for the nomination. The Republican Party does not have superdelegates.

Superdelegates are not selected on the basis of party primaries and caucuses in each state. Instead, superdelegate standing is based on the status of current or former officeholders and party officials, including all Democratic members of Congress. Superdelegate is a term that arose in the 1970s.

In order for a candidate to win the party nomination for president, he or she must gain the majority of delegate votes. The purpose of superdelegates is for high-ranking Democrats to maintain some control over the nominating process. Superdelegates make up one-fifth of the delegates at the Democratic National Convention. So, 747 of the 5,083 delegates attending the 2016 Democratic National Convention can choose whichever candidate they prefer.

Out of 2,470 total delegates at the Republican National Convention in 2016, 437 are unpledged delegates, who play the same role as superdelegates. Of the 437, 168 are members of the Republican National Committee.

[MissDeeds]

5. Your last paragraph is spot on

They are adding the super delegates to inflate Hillary's delegate count. Super delegates are not set in stone and can change.

My husband called out a Kansas City news reporter for repeatedly doing this. She apologized and said she'd separate them from now on.

BTW, she is an NBC reporter.

[Mbrow]

6. It looks like they vote, but

so far they have never gone against the popular vote, after all they did switch on HRC last time after coming out for her in the beginning . So we will wait and see what they do, but I'm not losing heart or worrying to much about them, when push come to shove and they don't back Bernie if he take the popular vote not many of them will be reelected because of the backlash. it would be easier to sideline Bernie as the president like they did Jimmy. This is why that if we win it's only the first step in a long uphill fight. I think we can win this.

[PoliticAverse]

9. They do vote and as you point out they did switch and go to Obama when he took...

the regular delegate lead from Clinton.

[enlightenment]

7. Well, according to Vox,

they do vote - though they have never, to date, voted against the will of the people:

There's one catch, though — if the race is very close or essentially a tie, it's certainly possible that superdelegates could tip the balance to Clinton rather than Sanders. Democratic superdelegates have never overturned the outcome of the popular vote before — in close contests, they've sided with whoever was ahead in the regular delegate count.

Entire article is worth a read.
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/11/10969120/superdelegates-clinton-sanders-democrats

[PoliticAverse]

8. "never in the history of the Democratic party ever cast even a single vote."

In 1984 neither Walter Mondale nor Gary Hart had enough regular delegates to
clinch the nomination. It was the "super-delegates" that were for Mondale that put him
over the top. The blogger seems to have no clue as to what they are talking about.

[Nictuku]

10. Thank you all for your thoughtful responses

After I read the article in the blog I didn't know what to think. It does sound like they vote in most of the articles sourced here. I do believe it will take more digging, but alas, I must get to sleep as I have to be up and out the door at 4:30 (hopefully this storm will have passed and started to clear up by then!).

Definitely some more food for thought, and definitely a reminder that everything we see on the TV should also be given more thought.

Either way, I think it is disingenuous to include them in any party's total delegate count before all the states have had their say in the primaries. And I do think it is to discourage getting out the vote, and in that sense, a dirty trick, however you look at it.

If the 'super delegates' have that much sway, then we, the people should know more about them, who they are (i.e. how many are lobbiests?) and how, if at all, they have any personal financial interests in getting their candidate elected.