"SUPER" Delegates

[noah617]

Oh i just thought it pointed up. My bad but I already fixed it. Thanks for the tip though I didn't know that.

 

[Kulindahr]

The rules provide for UPLEOs -- that's not hard to find; I googled it last week to try to figure out what the "superdelegates" are.

They're sort of like -- as Obama's man said -- "party elders". Whether that's a good idea or not is another matter; at present, that's the way it's done.
It does point up the fact that a party is a private organization, which doesn't really belong to the people in it.

 

[Kulindahr]

^^

It's commonly ignored in this forum -- but it's a very helpful way of referring to a post without filling space by quoting it, when it's close.

And BTW, he uses it because it's no more made-up than "superdelegates", which was invented by the media. If you want to be entirely proper, call them by the acronym UPLEOs.
Now you can ask Lance what that stands for.

 

[noah617]

I agree with Lance and Kulindahr in that the rules are the rules and everyone knew how the game was played going in. A private organization has no obligation to be fair, but the people aren't under any obligation to vote for what they perceive as an unfairly chosen candidate either.

 

[lancelva]

Oh? Show me exactly in the rules where it calls for "automatic delegates".

In the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention, as adopted by the Democratic National Committee, August 19, 2006; Rule 9, Section A (PDF):

A. The procedure to be used for certifying unpledged party leader and elected official delegates is as follows:

Not later than March 1, 2008, the Secretary of the Democratic National Committee shall officially confirm to each State Democratic Chair the names of the following unpledged delegates who legally reside in their respective state and who shall be recognized as part of their state’s delegation unless any such member has publicly expressed support for the election of, or has endorsed, a presidential candidate of another political party:

1. The individuals recognized as members of the DNC (as set forth in Article Three, Sections 2 and 3 of the Charter of the Democratic Party of the United States); and,
2. The Democratic President and the Democratic Vice President of the United States, if applicable; and,
3. All Democratic members of the United States House of Representatives and all
   Democratic members of the United States Senate; and,
4. The Democratic Governor, if applicable; and,
5. All former Democratic Presidents, all former Democratic Vice Presidents, all former Democratic Leaders of the U.S. Senate, all former Democratic Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives and Democratic Minority Leaders, as applicable, and all former Chairs of the Democratic National Committee.

 

[noah617]

^^^^(better? lol) No he uses it because his campaign made it up and decided it was a word better suited for getting the outcome it wants. Super delegate may not be the rule book word but it is the commonly accepted one that everyone knows and uses.

 

[lancelva]

If you want to be entirely proper, call them by the acronym UPLEOs.
Now you can ask Lance what that stands for.

Actually, the title of Unpledged Party Leaders & Elected Officials is not a sufficient synonym for automatic delegates because, depending on some state rules, some automatic delegates are pledged to specific candidates. (See Rule 9; Section C of the DNC's Delegate Selection Rules)

 

[lancelva]

^^^^(better? lol) No he uses it because his campaign made it up and decided it was a word better suited for getting the outcome it wants. Super delegate may not be the rule book word but it is the commonly accepted one that everyone knows and uses.

No, the term is actually derived from Rule 9, Section E, of the DNC's Delegate Selection Rules.

 

[chance1]

Chance, you're trying to walk on cotton candy here -- you keep sinking, and all you get is sticky.

Lance is quite right that they each have one vote at the convention. You're not even arguing his point, you're doing like a professional politician and changing the question to what you wish had been asked, not what was.
And you're expecting a private organization to adhere to some white-tower principles you hold. If that's what you want, you need to rise to the top of that organization and get your ideas imposed. You want this to be an election process, which it isn't: it's a selection process. If the DNC had decided they were going to take a list of registered Democrats and randomly pick 100 of them to be "lottery delegates", they'd be perfectly entitled to do that.
This isn't government, and it isn't "of the people, by the people, and for the people", it's a private organization's internal workings. That's why the contention that Hillary aims to "steal" the nomination is baseless; she is so far following the party rules. And if she gets the DNC to recognize the Florida vote, that will also be following the party rules, since presumably they can make exceptions to the rules.
Is the current process fair? Not entirely.
Is the current process democratic? Definitely not.
But the current process is legal and legitimate, and as Democrats love to say, if you don't like the system, change it.

not sure why u entered the fray kuli

im being very clear

SUPER delegates are not like pledged delegates

and i explained why

but i will do so again

in my example it takes 20,000 individuals to create 1 pledged delegate

AL GORE is a super delegate - and did not require 20,000 votes

he just shows up and says "xyz is my choice"

AND I KNOW THEY EACH HAVE ONE VOTE AT THE CONVENTION

my point is it requires lotsa voters to generate 1 pledged delegate

and it requires 1 dem party hack to generate 1 super delegate

can i be any clearer?

im not expecting anything

just stating the obvious

that the whole super delegate thing is NOT the same as pledged delegates

thanks for listening if not hearing

and if i havent' said so already

the superdelegate "system" blows

the party of the people - sticking the people up the ass

 

[noah617]

^^And who did, and why did he, do the deriving?

 

[Twisted06]

^What happened to all of your "rules" talk? The rules call for automatic delegates. And both sides, as you've said before, have agreed to the rules.

dude give up with the ignorant obama supporters. there just pissy because the automatic delegates dont benefit obama. if he had the lead with them they be singing a complete different tune.

 

[syntax]

"Ignorant"? You've got some nerve...

ICO, relax. Twisted's posts are typically illegible and nonsensical. Perhaps when he learns how to spell and write properly, then he can legitimately call people who do not share his political opinions "ignorant."

 

[Kulindahr]

Twisted, you need to read before posting. Not everyone pouncing on Hillary here is an Obama support, and not everyone defending Hillary is her supporter. Some of us just don't like foolish and egregious posts. Some, like Chance, are trying to argue from principle.

Chance, I "join[ed] the fray" because you were arguing against Lance's posts but not even dealing with what he was saying. And I responded to your near-whine about things not being democratic, because they don't have to be: the parties are private organizations and can do as they please.

 

[MystikWizard]

ICO, relax. Twisted's posts are typically illegible and nonsensical. Perhaps when he learns how to spell and write properly, then he can legitimately call people who do not share his political opinions "ignorant."

I've learned that, as well. That's why I've decided to Ignore his posts.