Oh those pesky super delegates undermining the will of the people

[rareboy]

To be honest, I don't get the whole primary system anyway....it seems to be a painfully expensive long walk to choose the candidate.

It doesn't appear to improve the quality of candidates and in fact seems to do the opposite by making campaigning the domain of people owned by big moneyed interests.

By 2016, you'd think that there would be a simpler, less expensive system.

Although, I suppose elections are now such a huge part of the American economy, providing hundreds of thousands of people with employment they otherwise would not have.

 

[TickTockMan]

To be honest, I don't get the whole primary system anyway....it seems to be a painfully expensive long walk to choose the candidate.

It doesn't appear to improve the quality of candidates and in fact seems to do the opposite by making campaigning the domain of people owned by big moneyed interests.

By 2016, you'd think that there would be a simpler, less expensive system.

Although, I suppose elections are now such a huge part of the American economy, providing hundreds of thousands of people with employment they otherwise would not have.

How does it differ from Canada?

 

[rareboy]

We have party conventions only when the leader of a party resigns (or dies) or there is a challenge to the leadership. Often, after a defeat, a prime minister may resign...but certainly not always. Some have returned as leader of the opposition.

Traditionally, each riding association of a party holds a special meeting to elect a fixed number of delegates to represent it at a leadership convention. These meetings would often select "alternate delegates" or "alternates", who would attend the convention, but vote only if one of the delegates from the riding association was unable to attend. In addition, delegates are often selected by the party's youth and women's associations in each riding, and party associations at university and college campuses.

In addition to the elected delegates, a large number of ex officio delegates attend and vote at leadership conventions. These ex officio delegates are automatically entitled to attend by virtue of being an elected member of parliament for that party, a member of an affiliated party in a provincial legislature, a member of the party's national or provincial executive, of the executive of an affiliated women's or youth organization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_convention


At the riding association level, the delegates may be selected based on the candidate that they support for the leadership, or they may be elected as an undeclared delegate.

The Green Party, by the way, selects their leader by mail-in votes from members in good standing.

The beauty of this system is that a leader may be selected years before they ever fight an election as leader of their party and because it is done on a constituency riding basis....their isn't the hype about how one province is leaning versus another. It comes down to the delegates from all ridings turning up to vote for the leader.

 

[rareboy]

We have party conventions only when the leader of a party resigns (or dies) or there is a challenge to the leadership. Often, after a defeat, a prime minister may resign...but certainly not always. Some have returned as leader of the opposition.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_convention


At the riding association level, the delegates may be selected based on the candidate that they support for the leadership, or they may be elected as an undeclared delegate.

The Green Party, by the way, selects their leader by mail-in votes from members in good standing.

The beauty of this system is that a leader may be selected years before they ever fight an election as leader of their party and because it is done on a constituency riding basis....[STRIKE]their [/STRIKE]there isn't the hype about how one province is leaning versus another. It comes down to the delegates from all ridings turning up to vote for the leader.

Jesus.

spellcheck.

 

[BenDan]

To be honest, I don't get the whole primary system anyway....it seems to be a painfully expensive long walk to choose the candidate.

It doesn't appear to improve the quality of candidates and in fact seems to do the opposite by making campaigning the domain of people owned by big moneyed interests.

By 2016, you'd think that there would be a simpler, less expensive system.

Although, I suppose elections are now such a huge part of the American economy, providing hundreds of thousands of people with employment they otherwise would not have.

a shorter cycle would be ideal, removing bullshit and expense

 

[TX-Beau]

I like the idea of removing state by state horse-races from the equation - I find myself thinking YEAH, why DO Iowa Vermont pretend they're somehow representative of everyone else.

 

[hotatlboi]

At least I understand the Superdelegate system more than I did, now. In this case the "Super-" prefix doesn't mean ultra-powerful (as in Superman or Superball lottery), but its secondary meaning sort of "Removed from" or "Outside of". One Superdelegate is still equal to one vote (not 7 or 12 or something like I thought), just that they are not beholden to ANYTHING in the process.

I've actually heard 87% to 13% (doing the math where I heard about a 74% spread), which is even worse.

The logic has been presented, but it all only proves that the system of electing the Democratic candidate is profoundly undemocratic.

Would they still do this, if the DNC ORDERS that they really need to vote for Hillary...

...or else, if they don't vote for Hillary, they will never be hired by the DNC again?

I may rail against Repugnantans a lot, but neither do I trust the DNC even as far as you can throw a grand piano.

The DNC would under no circumstances order anyone to support Hillary. That would split the party and cause Bernie's supporters to revolt, possibly not supporting Hillary in the general when the D nominee needs their support.

 

[frankfrank]

^ Has the threat of something like that possibly happening, ever kept a political party from doing backroom shenanigans before?

 

[hotatlboi]

^ Has the threat of something like that possibly happening, ever kept a political party from doing backroom shenanigans before?

Again, yes. 2008.

 

[TX-Beau]

The function of "Super-Delegates" is fundamentally anti-democratic. I would go so far as to say that it is DELIBERATELY anti-democratic no matter what Harry had to say about it on the TV.

They are a check on the wild political abandon of regular folk.

The idea didn't spring out of no where, our very cherished political structure was also designed with an ingrained paranoia of a Cletus or Goober with a voter registration card - because you just can't trust Digger with an opinion.

Electoral College.