Hillary supporters: Does the 'will of the people' count? Simple question.

[GarbagemanLB]

I keep hearing this as the reason for including MI and FL at the convention...yet most of you also see nothing wrong with Superdelegates overruling the pledged delegate winner? Doesn't that seem sort of hypocritical to you?

[ima_sinnic]

1. HRC supporters believe in cronyism--e.g., Richardson is a "traitor"

the only thing that matters in the world of Hillary supporters is who's doing favors for whom.
So, no, the will of the people doesn't count.

[MyNameGoesHere]

17. Hmm as a Hillary supporter i respond with the same wit and

intelligence that you did.



.



.



.



.



.




Oh yeah I did not find any wit or intelligence in that post.

[Tarc]

2. Not hypocritical at all, as your argument is a false premise

There is no such thing as superdelegates "overriding" pledged delegates; it is a weaksauce argument invented by Team Obama. There are simply two stages to winning the nomination of the Democratic Party. One side is in no way, shape, or form obligated to vote as the other one does. The supers are our Representatives, Senators, governors, former presidents, and party leaders, and they should vote according to their own preference.

[pocoloco]

3. WTF

They are our Representatives but but but they should vote according to their own preference.

[Tarc]

5. They represent you and your state/district in Congress

They are not your representative to the Democratic Party itself. Their superdelegate vote is in no way tied to you, son.

[SoonerPride]

6. Translated: backroom shenanigans are still within the rules

While transparency and democracy are on one hand, you've got smoke filled rooms and secret cabals working to install some preferred insider on the other.

Pardon us for opposing that kind of crap.

Storm the Bastille and off with their heads!

[Tarc]

8. If you don't like it, then go find another party?

These are the rules of the game, and they have been in place for 20-25 years now. Crying about it now just make you look kinda weak.

[Lucky 13]

11. WOW. The MI and FL rules were set up by the party, before the election, and agreed to by all.

Including Hillary.

If you don't like the party rules how bout YOU go find another party.

[Tarc]

14. The difference there is that ignoring two critical general election states

will doom the eventual nominee to a general election loss, so like it or not something must be done to address that aspect of this. Dean, the party leaders, and the state parties handled this situation horribly in my opinion. It would've been better to just follow the GOP model and seat 1/2 delegates rather than strip entirely.

[Lucky 13]

29. Probably should have brought that up earlier, huh?

Why didn't your brilliant candidate bring this up when the rules were being formulated? As it stands, both she and her supporters were behind this until they realized MI and FL might help them. Now they are "OUTRAGED"! Give me a fucking break.

You can't change the rules 1/2 way through. It's not fair to the other candidates who have followed through on their promise to play by the rules. What if Edwards had stayed on the ballot in MI and won by a landslide? It would have changed the direction of his campaign and certainly given him cause to stay in a bit longer, which, would have obviously changed future races results by some degree or another.

Counting the votes as they stand now isn't fair to the people who didn't go to the polls that day either. People thought their vote was meaningless. You can't tell someone their vote doesn't count and then later try to count it! It reeks of election fraud. Can you imagine a situation where it is a Republican vs. a Democrat and an announcement is made that the vote will not count? It is certainly within the realm of possibility to think that the Repubs would call up people and tell them to be sure to go vote anyway. Then later cry foul and try to get all the votes counted? OUTRAGEOUS.

Trying to do a "do-over" at this point is economically impractical. Because this fight has been so long and so hard, the DNC does not have the money to hold another election. The states won't pay for another election. Hillary backers offered to pay for a new election (but there are ethics questions in relation to that). And as I said before, had Michigan had a legitimate election, it could have changed the face of the race if Edwards had done well.

The only people in a tizzy over this are in Hillary's campaign. And I don't give a flying fuck if they're upset. They are upset about EVERYTHING because they are DESPERATE. They think everything is unfair, up to and including this brazen upstart DARING to question the queens right to the throne.

[GarbagemanLB]

37. Seat them 50/50. End of discussion.

[Ravy]

21. Actually, the rules were put in place well into the election.

Before the actual voting, to be sure, but the field was set and there had already been several debates when the party ruled that no delegates would be seated from Fla and MI.

[susankh4]

7. Thanks for the clarity of your response!

[theredpen]

12. You are right about the superdelegates, but let's be honest about the spin

Both campaigns have tried to spin things their way. Clinton has made some really outrageous statements segmenting the pledged delegates, implying that they can (and should) change their votes, and that "caucus delegates" don't count.

Here's the basics on delegates:
Delegates awarded in a primary measure popular support.
Delegates awarded in caucuses represent grass-roots support (which I why I like Texas' hybrid system)
Superdelegates represent Democratic Party support.

All of these components are important. Obviously, only the primaries are truly Democratic, but pure democracy is not necessarily the best way to select a nominee. If the superdelegates throw the nomination to Clinton, those are the rules. Meanwhile, Clinton and her proxies should stop marginalizing results they don't like, such as Texas.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

4. the will of the people would be the POPULAR VOTE....

and what will you do if Clinton has that?

[DerekJ]

10. and fuck caucus states?!!

[MethuenProgressive]

9. Not if you're Obama, and the people live in Michigan and Florida!

Next!

[DerekJ]

13. Your queen signed on the pledge to disfranchise them to begin with...

Just because she lost, and now needs them, doesn’t make her the epitome for voter rights.

[Redbear]

15. If you include Florida and Michigan, the "will of the people" gets pretty murky.

The current pledged delegate status would be 49% Obama, 48% Clinton, and 3% Edwards/Uncommitted.

If (and it's a big IF) the numbers stayed that tight through June 4th, I think it would be a huge stretch to say any superdelegate vote would be "overturning the will of the people."

[SoonerPride]

16. Why would you include states that didn't vote?

They didn't vote.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

19. just because you don't include them (FL & MI) doesn't change the FACTS ..

Hillary has the POPULAR VOTE!

[Ravy]

18. It depends which "will of the people" you want to use.

Obama got more delegates in Texas, where formulas weighted various components, but Hillary won a direct vote of the people.

Which do *you* count as the "will of the people"?

In Novemeber, the "will of the people" will be measured by the Electoral College. If that standard was used to measure the "will of the people" in the Democratic Primary, Hillary needs one more state to win.

What gets me is posts like this that talk about this formulatic pledged delegate system, which is strongly defended because "that's the rules", yet the same people loudly decry the same rules that say how and why Superdelegates vote in the first place.

If the Superdelegates were to cast their votes for the person with the most pledged delegates, there would be absolutely no use for them in the process.

[SoonerPride]

20. More states, more votes, more delegates, more money.

This meme that it is somehow close is a farce.

He is the presumptive nominee.

[Ravy]

23. When you choose the criteria, you can make either the presumptive nominee.

Let the people vote.

[SoonerPride]

They have. And she lost. It is over.

Indeed, it is over.

She can't continue to run more debt. She's out of cash.

That's that cold hard truth.

[Ravy]

30. Maybe *you* have voted.. but many have not. nt

Democrats typically like to try to look out for everybody, not just themselves.

[SoonerPride]

33. It is a foregone conclusion. She is now Huckabee.

Oh, she can stay on the ballot, but she cannot overtake Obama. Thus he is the presumptive nominee.

I'm all for letting people vote, even though it won't matter.

The Republicans will still have primaries too, but for what? Same difference. Both races are over. We're just running out the clock here. The final score is no longer in doubt. She might even get a late field goal to make the score look closer, but the winner of the game is already decided.

[Ravy]

35. Yeah... keep saying that.

[Mezzo]

22. Ask the people of Texas. SHE won the popular vote, or is the will of the people only

important when it serves your guy.

Here's what I think. I think the DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION should be decided by the DEMOCRATS across the country. Saying let's disenfranchise the democrats in florida while we allow repig to vote in red state primaries give the GOp too much of a voice in the DEMOCRATIC primary.

Unfortuneately, that will not happen this round.

[GarbagemanLB]

24. Ironic how you decry 'repug votes' yet cite the Texas 'win' as an example of the will of the people.

[ksoze]

25. Your issue is with the DCC

they created the Super Delegate concept which is not a redundant delegate role. They are SUPPOSED to exercise judgement of their own, else why even have them?

[SoonerPride]

27. And their judgment will be to endorse Obama.

It is a moot issue, really.

He is the presumptive nominee.

[GarbagemanLB]

28. No, my issue is with this 'will of the people' argument that some Hillary supporters are spouting.

You can either let the pledged delegate winner win the nomination, or have the 'elites' choose another way. You cannot honestly say that the 'people have spoken' for a nominee if, in order to win, that nominee must use superdelegates to overrule pledged delegates.

[ksoze]

32. That "will of the people" mantra

is being used by Obama supporters also to support Hillary exited prematurely. This is your party that enacted these rules (Super Delegates) and it is unfortunate it does not allow you to insure your candidate wins until they vote.

[SoonerPride]

34. Up 35-14 with 1 minute to go. She can get a face saving TD, but will not win the game.

It is over, dear friends.

Obama is the presumptive nominee.

[ksoze]

36. your sports analogy sux

I suspect you leave games in the third quarter so you can get out of the parking lot first. This is not football it's a democratic election and if you sleep better with your presumptive nominee thing, go for it.

[SoonerPride]

38. No, I never leave before the game is over. But that doesn't mean the final outcome isn't known.

The final outcome of this contest is known.

Obama is the nominee.

Period.

You can stick your head in the sand if you want. But that doesn't chage the facts.

This one is over boys and girls.

[GoldieAZ49]

26. When ALL of the people, and delegates have voted, yes

the process will be complete and the nominee choosen

[Awsi Dooger]

31. I never want to rely on so-called will of the people

Do away with primaries, at least on the presidential level if not everywhere. Let an all-powerful party boss or bosses dictate the nominee. That's something I've posted repeatedly for years on DU, dating before 2004, so I can hardly be accused of molding to favor Hillary in this case.

I don't trust generic public opinion, compared to the handicapping of experts in the field. Too many inept priorities, and flawed application of those priorities. Bottom line: We'd win more often in November if the masses aren't involved in March.

But absolutely, if you're going to use a 50-state primary system then make it 50 not 48. Howard Dean was a klutz in agreeing to anything else, without foresight in how potentially vulnerable we could be in Florida and Michigan if the voters there felt disenfranchised.

And that's the admitted flaw in my top-down idea. You need the proper person in charge at the top, someone with long term standing and understanding at the national level, not a quick vaulter. I certainly wouldn't be confident in Howard Dean isolating our best presidential hope.