home
The Will Of The People: The Popular Vote | 188 comments (188 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Um (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:17:24 AM EST
Because you say so? What if Superdelegates say it is about the will of the people - the popular vote? You gonna complain?

[ Parent ]
This is the point of impasse (5.00 / 3) (#17)
by andgarden on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:29:24 AM EST
Obama supporters have decided that a lead in pledged delegates, even if very small, cancels out any other consideration.

[ Parent ]
You mean Tweety and Punchline? (5.00 / 2) (#22)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:34:16 AM EST


[ Parent ]
CNN (5.00 / 6) (#42)
by Steve M on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:49:05 AM EST
actually did quite well last night, I thought, with the exception of John King.  All of their talking heads seemed to recognize the point that while the pledged delegate lead is Obama's best argument, it is still just an argument.

If reading the blogs is any indication, the strategy of Obama supporters is to create a made-up rule that superdelegates must follow the pledged delegates (in essence, making superdelegates 100% irrelevant to the process), and then to threaten riots and unrest if their made-up rule is violated.

[ Parent ]

then to threaten riots and unrest (none / 0) (#82)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:24:05 AM EST
I have already seen this today

[ Parent ]
then to threaten riots and unrest (none / 0) (#83)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:24:14 AM EST
I have already seen this today

[ Parent ]
sorry (none / 0) (#85)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:24:33 AM EST
how did that happen?

[ Parent ]
I thought (none / 0) (#91)
by kenoshaMarge on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:31:39 AM EST
the argument was that the Superdelegates had to follow the will of the people, i.e. the popular vote? Wasn't that supposedly why Lewis had to change his endorsement?

If I'm missing something please explain it to me slowly and simply cause I'm one of those old white working class women. :)

[ Parent ]

Geraldien Ferraro (none / 0) (#97)
by AmyinSC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:37:12 AM EST
Had an excellent editorial comment on this in the NY Times recently.  What you are hearing is the Obama camp hype - they WANT to force the Superdelegates to vote however is most convenient for them - you sure haven't heard them offering to give up Kennedy, Kerry, and Patrick's SP votes, even though Clinton won MA BIG.  No - the SDs are supposed to go by their CONSCIENCE, and who they think is the best candidate.  It's a bit electoral college, if you will.

Anywho - check out Ferraro's article - it's pretty good on explaining all of this.

[ Parent ]

Sorry - (none / 0) (#98)
by AmyinSC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:37:40 AM EST
I swear I can type - GERALDINE

[ Parent ]
And Markos and Aravosis (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by andgarden on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:59:29 AM EST


[ Parent ]
One of many impasses (5.00 / 2) (#35)
by po on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:42:39 AM EST
All I'm doing is pointing out that the Democratic Party, for various reasons, has created a process which virtually ensures that a large segment of the people who ostensibly make up the Party are going to be extremely upset with the outcome.

Who I support / supported / might support later (because both of them are really getting tiring) has nothing to do with the observation that the Democratic Party has totally messed up that which should not have been messed up -- the process of nominating the Party's Presidential nominee.  

[ Parent ]

probably (none / 0) (#15)
by po on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:24:25 AM EST
but complaining is something i like to do.  Besides, at the moment, the Democratic Party and the 2 remaining candidates are giving me lots to complain about.  

And since when were the Superdelegates some monolithic entity that's going to bend to the will of . . . what, the Party leadership?  None there, apparently or we wouldn't have MI and FL.  The People?  Their vote is split, thus the thread.  Special interests, as in their own?  Most likely.  The Supers are mostly politicians and the system is set up to protect its own.  

[ Parent ]

they are not monolithic (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:33:42 AM EST
For example, John Lewis switched to Obama because Georgia went for Obama. John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and Deval Patrick have no intention of switching to Hillary because Hillary won Massachusetts.

[ Parent ]
John Lewis (5.00 / 1) (#77)
by pennypacker on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:15:15 AM EST
swicthed because he was getting a primary challenge and his district voted four to one. He did not switch or have many based on who won there district or state.

[ Parent ]
And that proves my point (none / 0) (#45)
by po on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:51:21 AM EST
The Supers can support whomever they wish for whatever reason they wish.  The will of the People can come into play perhaps, but not necessarily.  In the age of targeting voters / districts to gain delegates, some people's vote counts more than others.  Sometimes, apparently, it's the Supers -- who are wildcards.

Mr. Lewis and the Kennedy's can always change their minds.  Hell, they probably don't even have to tell us publicly when they do.  Love the system, yet?  


[ Parent ]

The Will Of The People: The Popular Vote | 188 comments (188 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft