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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Clinton and media outlets are still counting superdelegates in voter tallies, despite pleas from DNC [View all]Gothmog
(180,658 posts)67. The press has always counted superdelegates in declaring the presumptive nominee is past primaries
Great article on how in every primary contest since the creation of super delegates, the winner was declared the presumptive nominee based on the inclusion of super delegates. http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/29/1532358/-What-Does-It-Mean-to-Clinch-the-Nomination-When-Superdelegates-Are-Involved
?1464557557
After reading a number of impassioned defenses of why the Democratic presidential nomination should not be called next week on June 7th, I got curious. Whats the history here, since the superdelegates were added to the process? When a Democratic candidate hits the magic number of pledged delegates plus superdelegates, are they the nominee?
The answer: history says the first person to get to the magic number is the presumptive nominee, and says it unambiguously, even if the losers often disagree.
Heres how it has gone since the superdelegates were added to the process.....
Summary
Anyway, I started this research 12 hours ago to answer a question for myself, so that as everyone on TV is spinning things this way and that on June 7th I have some context. What, if anything, have I learned?
First, most non-incumbent candidates have needed superdelegates to win, and the history of superdelegates has been that once a Democrat hits the magic number and becomes the nominee, superdelegates are more likely to flow to the nominee than from them.
Also, in the history of the superdelegates, they have always ended up supporting the decision of the pledged delegates, and their most important contribution has been to amplify leads of the pledged delegate winner so that they can be assured success on a first ballot, and avoid the sort of messy convention that harms a general campaign.
The major thing Ive learned is that the press declares, and has always declared, the winner after they hit the magic number, and has done so in far more nebulous circumstances than this. Even in 1984, in which Hart won by a number of other metrics, in which the delegate count was the arbiter, and Mondale announced himself as the nominee, even with 38 percent of the popular vote to Harts 36 percenteven then, Hart may have claimed he still had a cunning plan, but no one begrudged Mondale the fact he was, for all intents and purposes, the nominee.
When you think about it, that simply has to happen. Things need to get done, and they need the nominee to do them. Except for Reagan in 1976, who chose a running mate after Gerald Ford was made the nominee, there arent a whole lot of non-nominee candidates going to the convention with their own vice president picked out. You get to do that because the numbers say youre the nominee.
Meeting this number also allows the nominee to do the work of campaigning before the convention, establishing a message, building capacity on the ground, etc.
The press, for its part, has always understood this, from 1984 onward, and has named the nominee (or the presumptive nominee) the minute the candidate crosses the line with their combination of pledged and supers, and usually said something to the effect that they had clinched the nomination. They did that when Mondale had won far fewer states than Hart. They did that when Dukakis did not have 50 percent of the pledged delegates. They did that when Obama had not won the popular vote (yes, I know, MichiganI hope were still not fighting this?).
The answer: history says the first person to get to the magic number is the presumptive nominee, and says it unambiguously, even if the losers often disagree.
Heres how it has gone since the superdelegates were added to the process.....
Summary
Anyway, I started this research 12 hours ago to answer a question for myself, so that as everyone on TV is spinning things this way and that on June 7th I have some context. What, if anything, have I learned?
First, most non-incumbent candidates have needed superdelegates to win, and the history of superdelegates has been that once a Democrat hits the magic number and becomes the nominee, superdelegates are more likely to flow to the nominee than from them.
Also, in the history of the superdelegates, they have always ended up supporting the decision of the pledged delegates, and their most important contribution has been to amplify leads of the pledged delegate winner so that they can be assured success on a first ballot, and avoid the sort of messy convention that harms a general campaign.
The major thing Ive learned is that the press declares, and has always declared, the winner after they hit the magic number, and has done so in far more nebulous circumstances than this. Even in 1984, in which Hart won by a number of other metrics, in which the delegate count was the arbiter, and Mondale announced himself as the nominee, even with 38 percent of the popular vote to Harts 36 percenteven then, Hart may have claimed he still had a cunning plan, but no one begrudged Mondale the fact he was, for all intents and purposes, the nominee.
When you think about it, that simply has to happen. Things need to get done, and they need the nominee to do them. Except for Reagan in 1976, who chose a running mate after Gerald Ford was made the nominee, there arent a whole lot of non-nominee candidates going to the convention with their own vice president picked out. You get to do that because the numbers say youre the nominee.
Meeting this number also allows the nominee to do the work of campaigning before the convention, establishing a message, building capacity on the ground, etc.
The press, for its part, has always understood this, from 1984 onward, and has named the nominee (or the presumptive nominee) the minute the candidate crosses the line with their combination of pledged and supers, and usually said something to the effect that they had clinched the nomination. They did that when Mondale had won far fewer states than Hart. They did that when Dukakis did not have 50 percent of the pledged delegates. They did that when Obama had not won the popular vote (yes, I know, MichiganI hope were still not fighting this?).
This is a well researched article and confirms that the nomination process will be over on Tuesday June 7, 2016 when the results of the New Jersey primary are announced.
Sanders wants special rules and treatment.
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
70 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
Clinton and media outlets are still counting superdelegates in voter tallies, despite pleas from DNC [View all]
truthisfreedom
May 2016
OP
Good catch. I was scratching my head also. He did the proper attribution but the editor removed it.
LiberalArkie
May 2016
#16
Well, at least the editor got caught. I would imagine that happens a lot. People trying to
LiberalArkie
May 2016
#26
I don't know about the plagiarism, but what does that have to do with anything?
thesquanderer
May 2016
#8
I don't agree, but you can watch the video for yourself. He is not in it.
thesquanderer
May 2016
#19
It is Sanders who wants to disenfranchise women and people of color by asking supers to flip. nt
SunSeeker
May 2016
#28
By flipping superdelegates, Sanders would be negating the votes of women and POC.
SunSeeker
May 2016
#64
It has been common practice to include the SD's in the court. Stop the whining.
riversedge
May 2016
#14
Superdelegates have been included in media vote tallies since 1984, when the system began.
pnwmom
May 2016
#15
Shaun King wrote the article, so the outrage and hyperbole are to be expected.
annavictorious
May 2016
#17
I believe Jesse Jackson among others questioned the wisdom of Superdelegates.
Ford_Prefect
May 2016
#60
The pledged delegates don't vote until the convention, either. Does that mean the tally is 0-0?
George II
May 2016
#35
The other "meme" was that the superdelegates should vote with the people. But now that....
George II
May 2016
#37
Not reporting on the superdelegates who have supported one candidate or another
NobodyHere
May 2016
#49
The story goes that at least some of the Superdelegates were bought prior to any vote.
Ford_Prefect
May 2016
#63