The superdeligate concept completely undermines any notion that the democratic party is a party of its members.

Yes they can think on their own but everyone is ignoring this fact...

This is from the Library of Congress... - but it can also be found in "Dictionary of Politics" ---

The purpose of the "Hunt Commission" formed in 1980 -which created today's superdelegate system...was and I quote,

"to streamline the delegate selection process to party conventions and to DEMOCRATIZE the party itself, broadening the base of political participation by increasing input into the process of selecting presidential candidates, to strengthen ACCOUNTABILITY of public officials and strengthen the party itself whose base was weakened by the vigorous activities of the the Republican Party."

Speaker Pelosi's situation is entirely correct... the purpose of changes made to the selection process including superdelegates were in the direct goal of "democratizing the party" and holding public officials "Accountable" (and it references "to the members of the party" later in the section)to the party and therefore it's members/voters.

If caucus members (many of them Republicans) can overtrun the will of people in Texas and many other states, why can't superdelegates overturn the will of Repulicans and Obama supporters? Don't change the rule in the middle of the game. Shame on you, Obama!

If Richardson or Kerry can overturn the will of the people in their states, then every other superdelegate can!! Enough with this "issue". This is not even an issue.

“If they didn't want the superdelegates to have independent judgment, they wouldn't have created them,” Webb said in an exclusive “This Week” interview.

RIGHT ON!!!!!!!!!!!

After this election year, the superdelegate process should be abolished!

I gave 25 dollars to the DNC but it will be my last donation until each of the super delegates have donated 200,000 dollars based on the fact that a super delegates vote is worth 8000 to 1. The heck with it I am going to be an Independent. Let the
Democratic Party and its 800 super delegates see how far they make it in a general election. If they do not respect my vote in a primary they will not get it in a general. This is going to hurt down ballot democrats.

"Superdelegates" should not exist! EVERY state should have a BINDING primary election on a date established by the State Legislature, NOT by party bosses! America is trying to "sell" democracy to the rest of the world and we don't even practice it ourselves! The entire nominating process (as it now is done) should be unconstitutional. There are too many disenfranchised voters, not just in Michigan and Florida, but in any state which holds caucuses instead of a primary. Caucuses AND the convention circuses should be abolished, replaced by REAL primary elections. This way there would be NO delegates to make political deals (vote trading). The next thing to go should be the Electoral College. And they wonder why voter turnout isn't what it should be... maybe it's because our votes barely count! (Or in some cases, don't count at all!)

to: falsehope
So if we are not changing the rules you would agree that FL, MI don,t count.
bet id do not get an answer.

The superdelegates were created after 1968 to PROTECT the establishment, against new voters (i.e. the American people) coming in and taking over the party. (Like the Ron Paul Republicans this year) To say that these folks are "independent" and should have a veto over the will of the people who casts their votes, is an INSULT to the process of voting; As well as a complete turnaround from 2000. ("let EVERY vote be counted!") So when they lose, they want to circumvent the vote, when their ahead they want to "count" the vote. Folks, if they get away with this we truely are a Banana Republic, and should seriously consider the fact that we are given the illusion to "choose" whoever the party, the media, and big corporations deem fit for their agendas, and not of our own free will. But then again, Democracy failed us a long time ago. Do yourselves a favor and read US history, particularly the part which states we are a Republic, NOT a Democracy!!! Big government and corporate media NEVER we're meant to help elect or hand our choice of options of prospective leaders over into the hands of the few, verus the will of the people. The sooner you realise that and demand change in our voting process, you will be confronted with the same kind of disaster, you see today.

Obama Supporters,
Why is it you insist on following the rules when it comes to Florida and Michigan, but when it comes to allowing SuperDelegates to vote their independent judgements, and to overturn the pledged delegates (from making foolish mistakes), all within the rules, that you moan and complain. That seems rather hypocritical on your part don't you think?
========================================
Obama is green behind the ears!
Obama cannot close the deal!
Obama is unelectable!
========================================

It bothers me that instead on concentrating on earning this nomination by winning the remaining 10 contests by margins big enough to erase both Obama's delegate lead and popular vote leaqd, HRC is instead concentrating on having the Superdelegates overturn the will of the people and changing the rules on Michigan and Florida that she agreed to at the very beginning of this campaign. I will not pretend that i am not an Obama supporter. But i have consistently said that i will support Clinton with both my vote and cash if she "earns" this nomination. Mark my words, if Clinton somehow wins this nomination in any manner that smarks on shadiness, not only will she lose the black vote, young vote, and white liberal vote (which makes up 50% of the Democratic party). She will lose all 50 states to McCain in November. HRC, let me offer my humble opinion: Win the remaining contest by 65-35 split and you'll get the nomination. Concentrate on making your case to the voters as to why you think you, and not Obama, should be our nominee. This back-room, smoke-filled politics threatens to permanently damage the Democratic party. Let the candidate that has "earned" the nomination be the nominee.

The superdelegates will beigin to show who they are for after the PA Primary. Unless Hillary wins big, and she won't and perhaps not win at all, they will declare for Obama.

Obama08

THANK YOU, zyx! At least SOMEONE else recognizes the absurdity of the present nominating process! The way it is done now is an invitation to corruption, and leaves most of us out of the whole selection process.

Not only the superdelegates thing is hosed, and deliberately so when the left wingers historically produced candidates that won a handful of states in the general election, but this whole proportional delegate allocation thing, a politically correct nod to Jesse Jackson's runs, is insane.

Hillary won the popular vote of every large state except for Obama's Illinois and essentially split the delegates with Obama. The only way you come out ahead on delegates is some crazy caucus thing in Idaho or the Virgin Islands or whereever, certainly has nothing to do with democracy.

If superdelegates are to vote the will of the people, then all those Obama supporters in every state Hillary won need to be supporting the will of the people they represent, not the will of Republicans in red state Democratic caucuses.

But they won't. You won't see Kerry representing Massachsetts or Richardson representing New Mexico, but you will hear them say that superdelegates like them must not overturn the will of the people, even though they and every other big state superdelegate who supports Obama doesn't.

There are exceptions. There are congress representatives who represent districts that went Obama even though the state went Hillary, and they have a tough choice and can choose either, but most are ideologically opposed to democracy when they go against the will of the people they represent and stop Florida and Michigan from voting for Hillary.

So there's my take on the will of the people thing, Democratic Party circa 2008.

Hillary '08

HRC supporters ned to realize that regardless of their rage and anger about what's currently happening, their candidate lost 17 straight contests by incredibly large margins in February. She had the Democratic establishment around her, the initial money advantage, the Superdelegates, an incredibly popular ex-President husband, and a dashing ex-First daughter, all stumping for her, all beating her drum, yet she lost race after race after race, neglected the caucuses and got trampled. After the incompetence and idiocy of the HRC campaign, now she wants to play the victim and re-write the rules. HRC supporters, for all their anger, should at the very least agree that this campaign was their candidates' to lose. She lost it. She lost it badly due to her own incompetence. And to be so angry, to be so resentful, shows that just like Republicans supporting Bush, you guys are not willing to be honest about the facts. Obama, the so-called inexperienced politician, the so-called Green behind the ears candidate, the so-called unelectible candidate, is destroying your establishment candidate systematically. For all her advantage (4 homes states -NY, NJ, Arkansas, pennsylvania), she is still losing. You have to ask yourselves: Why is that?

ralphdaugherty

Your argument reflects the height of idiocy. Nobody is calling for Superdelegates to reflect the will of the people in their individual states. People are calling for the Superdelegates not to reverse the will of the American people that voted in the Democratic Primary nationwide. Are you seriously making this stupid argument with a straight face? If a candidate wins both the delegate race and popular vote, that candidate has earned the nomination. Period. Any other argument, is pure madness.

Why waste all the time money and energy spent on primaries. Lets let the super delegates just tell us who our candidate will be. We are way to stupid to pick a candidate, what kinda democracy would actually let we the people choose our leaders. Thats way to revolutionary an idea, the unwashed teaming masses in power. That could destroy the economy, lead us into unjustified and wasteful war, why it could even create a middle class that would demand to be educated, to demand health care & god knows what other horible demands gas maybe even a fair and just tax system.

Oh they will use their independent thinking alright.They will be thinking:
Who has the most votes.
Who leads in pledge delegates.
Who leads in the polls against McCain.
Who can bring in the most money.
Who can run the better Campaign.
Who can bring more voters to the table
Who can best represent Democratic ideals

These are the things that count.

Obama08

Kevin - enough with the hyperbole. Obama hasn't won by "incredibly large margins." Funny you don't mention CA, NY, TX, etc. "incredibly large states" that Clinton won. Instead of parsing the facts to suit your own ideas, maybe you should ask yourself a few questions. By the way, why do you think so many voters STILL support her? I'll answer it for you: because we think she is the best candidate; and not just a few -- millions. Interstingly, the bar keeps being raised for her. First they say if she wins this and that, then it's NOW she has to win this and that and NOW it's even if she wins PA. Face it, they keep trying to put barbed wire around the thing and we Clinton supporters keep showing up with the wire cutters.

Of course I'm arguing that superdelegates represent the will of the people they represent, not the will of other people. That's why they're a senator of congress member or governor of a state instead of a rubber stamp party boss machine.

Which is what they are if they don't represent their voters.

Hillary '08