Leak: Alaska superdelegate says she has no duty to represent state's voters


#1

[Read the post]


#2

The news here is more about the dangers of social media for political wanks rather than the fact that she has no duty to represent the state’s voters (she doesn’t, and it’s well known, and it’s really a part of how the party WANTS to operate).

Unfortunately, if you want to change the superdelegate madness, your only real option is to join the party and change it from within (it’s not even really clear how you would unless you were already a big time party hack and thus benefited from the system already).


#3

On the one hand, it would be, I think, unprecedented for the superdelegates to go against the primary voters. Has that ever happened?

On the other, this one delegate clearly thinks she only represents herself. Let’s don’t have a floor fight, okay guys? It will make us look like copycats.


#4

Luckily, enough of the superdelegates understand that overriding their party’s popular vote is political suicide in the general election. So in practice the superdelegates can only act either as a tiebreaker or a self destruct system.


#5

Why I’m not a Democrat? Because of this bullshit right here. And no, I’m not going to start a brand new career in politics just to have my vote count for something. Fuck that, fuck them, fuck her, fuck superdelegates, and fuck the Democratic Party as an institution. The Republican Party is not the only party that could stand to undergo a crisis. The DNC may be laughing now, but it’s only matter of time before it catches up with them.


#6

She right, though. The current system may be crazy, or at least mismatched to modern electoral politics, but superdelegates exist precisely so that the nominee is not chosen entirely by the electorate. She gets her own independent vote.


#7

The superdelegates are completely free to do what they want. And we are completely free to observe what they do, and decide whether we want to support their re-election. I haven’t yet heard any comments from any of the WA superdelegates in exactly the same position (although I have contacted all of the ones that represent me, and there was a petition sent to them all as well), but I’m sure they’ll take the same stance.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/washingtonians-hound-superdelegate-who-supports-clinton-after-constituents-favored

I’m hoping Kshama Sawant decides to run to replace Jim McDermott when he retires.

In other news, the GOP are now thinking about removing the 8 state rule they put in place to block Ron Paul, because now it’s an impediment to blocking Donald Trump.

Fuck political parties.


#8

How is this a leak when one of the parties involved shared it? What maroon writes down anything in an email or text they wouldn’t want shown in a court or to their mom?


#9

This isn’t a leak, it’s just reporting. But that’s boring and doesn’t grab the attention of the Buzzfeed generation.

I’m surprised the headline wasn’t “You won’t believe what happens when superdelegates go wild!”


#10

Isn’t that the whole point of superdelegates?


#11

Yep. They exist entirely to prevent a George McGovern or Jimmy Carter ever getting the nomination again.

See also how furious Labour Party MPs are that making their leadership election open led to Jeremy Corbyn winning. Political parties don’t much like their own membership, or their opinions.


#12

Yup. This whole Superdelegate scandal is stupid. The supers exist to give the party some control over the party. Its not meant to be representative of the electorate, the leaders want CONTROL.

Also, it seems crazy to me that regardless how inspiring an independent candidate is, why do people expect the party to bail on one of their own for an interloper who generally caucuses with them?

I don’t like the system. I don’t want this system, but folks expecting Superdelegates to do the job you want instead of the job they took? That makes no sense to me. Super delegates are supposed to vote how the party wants.

Also, HRC tried to get Superdelegates to turn away from Obama in 2008 when she was closer to his totals than Bernie is to hers now. Did not work for her, why would it work for an “outsider” ?


#13

Well, superdelegates are a new thing; I have no idea if Alaska’s law against faithless electors would apply to them. But faithless electors and electoral shenanigans are certainly nothing unprecedented.


#14

Seconded!


#15

But is the party’s will not the sum will of its members? How can the party’s will be established prior to its vote - feels a little catch-22.


#16

I don’t think the EURion constellation will work with "5"s. You need a closed circle.


#17

What? Have you looked at either party in years? They are competing corporations who broker influence. How does the GOP even claim to serve its base?


#18

Breaking News: Superdelegate says she has no duty to represent state’s voters, confirming exactly what superdelegates are defined as and were created to do!

Oh wait there’s no news here, even without the superdelegates Bernie is still losing and has a tiny chance of getting a pledged delegate majority.


#19

Daddy doesn’t always give you what you want, precious, he gives you what you need. That’s the service.

Excuse me, I have to go wash my mouth out with soap now. Or possibly bleach.


#20

Well done on a silver plate with a Bearnaise sauce.