Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

Great blog on the web for those of you who don't know about it directly from an uncommitted superdelegate.

www.mrsuper.org

He/she plays things down the middle and gives users an interesting read:

On when to declare a preference:

I'm watching the numbers roll in after Senator Clinton's 10-point win.  I've spoken to one network and one newspaper.  Some rumors going around about some major Superdelegate shifts on Wednesday morning - that would be something if it were true, wouldn't it?  (It's probably not true).

There is a lot of debate going on over on private DNC member listserves tonight.  The main issue is a) do we make our leanings known now or b) do we wait until all of the states have had an opportunity to vote?

As of this writing, there is not a consensus.

On Michigan and Florida:

Last Friday I posted about the notion of some Supers waiting to see the final resolution on appeals put forth by Florida & Michigan before making a decision.  This story issued today has me thinking about this idea again as well.

Florida and Michigan should be seated at the convention, but they should not be allowed to play a factor in this nomination process.

Edit: The leadership of these states failed their voters.  And it is disingenuous for that leadership to cry disenfranchisement when they knew the rules, they knew the penalties, and they moved forward anyway.  Thus we should include the states at the convention, but we should not reward them by granting them leverage during the nomination process.  The best solution to this is to seat the delegates and not give them a vote, or to split the vote allocations 50/50 for each candidate - in effect nullifying their votes.

My comments last week were as follows:

   "...as much as I stand by my comments in that I don't want to see the nomination tipped one way or another by Supers, I would much prefer that Supers decide this thing than allowing delegates from unsanctioned Florida and Michigan elections to determine the nominee.  That would be the ultimate injustice because it would be rewarding to rouge states, no matter who the nominee shall be."

The DNC rules which are currently in place came about from a commission which was created at the urging of the Michigan delegation in 2004.  The recommendations of the commission passed with near unanimity in 2006, including support from Florida and Michigan.  The law changing the primary date in Michigan was passed and enacted by Democrats, while the law changing the primary date in Florida was supported by nearly every single Democratic member of the Florida legislature...and it was endorsed by the Chair of the Florida Democratic Party.

My favorite comparison of the Florida and Michigan situation was made on the "Stumped" blog at the Washington Post:

   I have a spirited 3-year-old boy. The other day I told him that if he really wanted to have a big cookie in the middle of the afternoon, he wouldn't be able to have dessert after dinner. Sebastian opted for the cookie, but then still threw a tantrum after dinner, acting as if his human rights were being violated when I told him we'd have to abide by his earlier choice.

   Leading politicos from Florida and Michigan are acting a lot like Sebastian these days.

Tags: superdelegate (all tags)

Comments

15 Comments

Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

You guys should check the blog out.  Gives a good pulse on what's going on.

by mefck 2008-04-24 07:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

The three year old throwing a tantrum analogy was priceless.  And I'm glad that some SDs are seeing this mess for what it is:  that the leadership in MI and FL failed their constituents and should be held accountable by those same constituents.  The Democratic National Committee is not the accountable entity here.

by jarhead5536 2008-04-24 07:44AM | 0 recs
Snort.

I have a spirited 3-year-old boy. The other day I told him that if he really wanted to have a big cookie in the middle of the afternoon, he wouldn't be able to have dessert after dinner. Sebastian opted for the cookie, but then still threw a tantrum after dinner, acting as if his human rights were being violated when I told him we'd have to abide by his earlier choice.

Leading politicos from Florida and Michigan are acting a lot like Sebastian these days.

How true. Enthusiastically recommended.

by MBNYC 2008-04-24 07:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Snort.

I've said it before and I will say it again

Supers aren't idiots, they were around when Hillary said it wouldn't count, and they ALL noticed that the second she needed it she had no problem throwing the DNC under a bus and arguing for them to be seated.

they aren't idiots they will see the you tube of the FL legislature mocking Dean when they moved the primaries.

and they will notice how Hillary has no problem NOT counting caucus states after she didn't prepare for em.

they aren't Idiots and then HRC supporters can't figure out why Obama keeps getting endorsements

by TruthMatters 2008-04-24 07:52AM | 0 recs
Yup.

The essential disconnect here is that Hillary will do anything required to win for herself, no matter if there's a price to be paid down-ballot, as with disparaging states, toying with the rules, disparaging the DNC, and so on.

The supers want to see Democrats overall win, because in many cases, they are those other Democrats on the ballot. Hillary is willing to pay a higher price for her own future than they are.

by MBNYC 2008-04-24 08:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Yup.

Or disparaging the activists at moveon.org.

by mefck 2008-04-24 08:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Yup.

Or telling people to vote on God and guns when Democrats do so well if they do. The list just goes on and on.

by MBNYC 2008-04-24 08:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Yup.

So will Obama.

By not supporting a revote for MI, he essentially gives up those 17 electoral votes to McCain (see Jerome's Diary).

Hillary, on the other hand, WINS MI against McCain - so what does that tell you?

COUNT THE VOTES.

by nikkid 2008-04-24 03:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

um - i dont buy it.  also - if supers were a monolithic voting bloc we would not be having this conversation right now.

by canadian gal 2008-04-24 08:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

Don't buy what?

by mefck 2008-04-24 08:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

that either a) this is a real super or b) that this person is undecided

"Some rumors going around about some major Superdelegate shifts on Wednesday morning - that would be something if it were true, wouldn't it?  (It's probably not true).  I BELIEVE THE UNDECIDED SUPERS ARE FREAKING RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE TORN FOR WHATEVER REASON RIGHT NOW (POSSIBLY FOR SELF-SERVING REASONS) WHICH IS WHY THEY HAVE NOT DECIDED

There is a lot of debate going on over on private DNC member listserves tonight.  The main issue is a) do we make our leanings known now or b) do we wait until all of the states have had an opportunity to vote?"  YEH - ALOT OF SUPERS GOIN ON LISTSERVS...

by canadian gal 2008-04-24 12:13PM | 0 recs
From friends at the DNC

If you have not been involved in a PUSA race before, you may be unaware the degree to which the Party becomes a proxy of the campaign.  Currently the DNC, and many state parties, are holding meeting with the Obama campaign to plan for the fall.  They are not doing the same for the Clinton campaign.  Seemingly eveyone within the party is aware, and planning on, him being the nominee.

by CardBoard 2008-04-24 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: From friends at the DNC

That's very interesting.

by mefck 2008-04-24 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

It's nice to see at least some people are reasonable about the rules. I was particularly tickled by Clinton supporter Joel Ferguson trying to propose today that Michigan be seated according to the rogue contest but that the punishment should be a half vote for each elected delegate and a full vote for each super delegate. If anybody in this whole sad situation should be punished it's the super delegates for their gross failure of leadership. Why should they be given a full vote when the people whom they failed only get a half vote?

by Obama Independent 2008-04-24 08:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Hear Directly From An Undecided Superdelegate

My favorite comparison of the Florida and Michigan situation was made on the "Stumped" blog at the Washington Post:

  I have a spirited 3-year-old boy. The other day I told him that if he really wanted to have a big cookie in the middle of the afternoon, he wouldn't be able to have dessert after dinner. Sebastian opted for the cookie, but then still threw a tantrum after dinner, acting as if his human rights were being violated when I told him we'd have to abide by his earlier choice.

  Leading politicos from Florida and Michigan are acting a lot like Sebastian these days.

so, the voters who did not have a say in this, are the ones who don't get the cookie.

bad analogy.

by colebiancardi 2008-04-24 09:04AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads