|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
posted February 06, 2008 05:55 PM |
|
|
|
There's 842 of these jagoffs!? Wtf!? I thought there were maybe a 100 at the most. Are you freaking serious that Hillary's greatest chance of winning is because of the smoky room deals made with these pricks!? Unbelieveable.
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted February 06, 2008 06:06 PM |
|
|
Well, often forgotten is that, while the US has been a two party system for so long and in such an entrenched manner, the Democratic and Republican parties are not actually government organizations, they are essentially private political parties.
What is being determined in the primaries is who each of these political parties will nominate and support both financially and organizationally in their attempts to win the presidency. Thus, it is actually party rules rather than government rules which determine who wins the nomination. In theory, the party leadership could simply say "Our nominee is so and so" and be done with it. However, as a gauge of electibility, primaries and caucuses are held using a combination of state and party rules (for instance, party rules are why Michigan and Florida have been punished in terms of delegate votes at the convention). The superdelegates are Democratic party leaders/celebrities that, for whatever the reason the party has decided are given a vote at the convention. The Republicans have the same thing, but they call them something else. Probably "Elite Bloodsucking Vampire" or something like that.
It could probably be described as a semi-democratic process, but political parties can choose their candidate however they want, including steel cage death match. I'd hope that at the actual convention, if there is a situation where one of the candidates has received more of the actual delegates than the other, the superdelegates would take that as an indicator of overall electibility and vote accordingly, but they are not required to do so.
And for an out there, only if I'm playing with house money scenario, how about THIS for a scenario:
Clinton wins Democratic Party nomination through super delegates.
McCain wins Republican Party nomination since the conservative vote is being split between Romney and Huckabee.
The right wing thug element of the Republican Party refuses to support McCain, leading to a third party candidate named Evangelical D. Extremist.
A FOURTH ticket emerges of Bloomberg/Obama with the monetary might of Bloomberg and the charisma of Obama.
Ain't gonna happen, but with all the candidates trying to incorporate "Change" into their theme, it'd be real change, eh?
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted February 06, 2008 08:53 PM |
|
|
Report from the Obama Front
Okay, I have to get this out of my system and this is the most obvious place to do it. (spell-check edits to come)
I apologize for going on in advance.
I am the Obama Precinct Captain for my precinct. For the last four months, as of Sunday evening last, I have: driven to Iowa and back to canvass there twice with my eleven-year old son in tow (who is now known in the Colorado Obama Campaign as "the little dude with the long braid" and is considered a "precinct co-captain"), I have printed up literally thousands of copies of flyer stuffers containing my own writings from my computer containing my one-page analysis of why to vote for Obama, kicked out approximately 350 DVD's with excerpts of Obama's Keynote Address and campaign announcement speech, made approximately five hundred packets, knocked on approximately seven hundred doors, made approximately six hundred phone calls, convinced my Ruby-Ridge-style libertarian brother, my formerly Republican mother and husband, and several other family members to change their affiliation to Democrat in order to vote for Obama, helped my heretofore Republican mother (who is 84) be a precinct captain in another city, located approximately 38 people in my neighborhood who committed to show up at the caucus for Obama, and thrown a house party to feed them all cookies and train them on the caucus process.
Here's the scene that played out across Colorado last night (at least for the most part). Keep in mind that the previous caucus for my precinct was attended by a whopping seven people (about average for the country):
I arrive with the little dude with the long braid at the caucus last night at 5:45 p.m., an hour and fifteen minutes early. Our precinct caucus is one of six being held at a local elementary school. There are several people also already arriving, nobody knows which door to go in. The parking lot is nearly half full already. We all make our way to an unlocked door and snake through the building to the school library, which looks like it might hold a hundred people if everybody stood up, and which is supposed to hold all six precincts. There are eight to ten Hillary people already there (I have recently discovered that the JeffCo Dems House District Chair lives three houses away and is the county Clinton coordinator ("CCC") and I have never met her nor do I know what she looks like.)
By 5:55 there are approximately 40 people in the room, all the seats are taken and chaos is beginning to break out. I finally locate the Dem party precinct captain and we immediately begin trying to coordinate the room by splitting it up into precincts.
By 6:10 the room is packed, and people are lined up in the hallway seeking directions. The janitors come down and unlock five classrooms, we start breaking up the precincts and sending them into the rooms. The room for my precinct is the smallest one (looks like the media room, full of bookshelves and desks, about 20 by 30 feet) and people come swarming in before we can get the sign-up table set up. The chairs fill instantly. Obama people and Clinton people are all mixed in together, and we don't have enough room to try to separate them so they continue to be mixed up as they filter in and get registered. We herd more people into a registration line snaking around a table and back into the hallway, which is threaded with lines for the other five precinct rooms. I put cookies of all sorts and about three dozen bottles of water and tea on the table which is now surrounded and crowded with dozens of Clinton and Obama people alike, everybody already beginning to look hot and miserable, and invite everyone to have some (I think my quote was "Everybody get some snacks I don't care if you're Obama people or not" which actually drew a tension-breaking chuckle from them).
By 6:15 I take the first head count and there are over 40 people already in our room alone. The dems precinct captain is busily signing each person in (which involved each person filling out a form and was taking for ever). Second head count at about 6:25: Now there are over 50 people crowded into the room, people are standing, sitting on the floor, sitting on the desks, and generally milling around.
CCC then finally arrives (at around 6:25) as I continue to assist ushering people from our precinct into the room. She is completely plastered with Hillary stickers and orders me to get in line to register without introducing herself. I do not know who she is and she does not realize that ordering me to do anything is usually a dangerous thing to do, but under these circumstances I politely tell her the people still need help finding the location. Then I ask her -- Are you (CCC)? and greet her and introduce myself enthusiastically, telling her I live right down the street. Her ice barely seeps a drop. I remain my overly gushy self and completely ignore her unfriendliness, telling her how good it is to finally meet her. Again she orders me to get in line and then walks away. I continue what I am doing.
By 6:50 there are now 63 people in the room, with a few still outside the door. Several people do not know their precinct number. I call Obama headquarters several times and help them find their way, moving in and out of the room into the hallway, clearing out the final stragglers.
I note that three of my people are missing, but still see Obama buttons and stickers all over the place, as well as Hillary stickers.
At 7 p.m. there are still approximately fifty people remaining to be registered for the meeting. The dems captain asks me for a final headcount as she begins the meeting with registration continuing. The crowd is huge, packed in together like sardines and a little stiff, but quiet and respectful. They see me taking the last of several counts, and begin smiling back at me as I count each one of them yet another time. At the end the crowd is quiet, and I begin to count out loud as I reach the end, fading into full voice: ...'sixty nine, seventy, seventy one, seventy two, seventy three -- okay people we are seventy four strong tonight -- take a look around and give yourselves a hand!!!"
A genuine cheer rises up from the entire crowd (despite that I have Obama buttons, bells, stickers and whistles all over my body).
It's what Obama would have done...
CCC's daughter is elected chair for the caucus, and begins reading the rules (which are several pages long). By now CCC has figured out that I am not the enemy. Either that or she's getting the picture that she's starting to look bad by being rude to me in front of a bunch of people who apparently recognize me as one of the group leaders. Maybe both. We all begin working together on getting a straw poll count of the number for each group.
Clinton: 38
I clap enthusiastically and glance around nodding to encourage my people to do the same which they do.
Obama: 33 (if only my other three had come!)
Once again, the tone having been set and the ice broken, everyone applauds enthusiastically.
Richardson: 1
Another round of applause.
Undecided: 2.
These two actually got a round of playful jeering which caused them and everyone else to chuckle.
The last person to actually register for the meeting, I finally sign in at 7:30 p.m.
Due to the lateness of the hour, the chair moves to allow one person from each camp one minute to talk. It is seconded. I interrupt and asked for at least two people to speak given such a large group (and I know I don't think on my feet that fast). Someone seconds the motion and it carries. The chair offers me the floor.
Holy S***!
Okay, so I shoot my wad. I respect Hillary, she's a great public leader admired by millions. But here it is: Obama is the only one who can beat McCain and we don't want a repeat of the 2004 election.
Some jeers and boos rise up from the Hillary people back in the corner. My people appear surprised at their rudeness and flash a glance in their direction. I put up a hand to quiet everyone, and finish my piece about the need to unite congress, and that we have a president of the Republican Party right now and we need a president of the United States, not a president of the Democratic Party.
My minute's up and then some. I sit down on the floor in order to avoid passing out as my people applaud wildly and the Clinton people politely join in. The first Clinton rep gets up and goes on about how women have been bumping up against a glass ceiling until now and the glass needs broken. Again wild cheers and polite applause.
Two more people speak, each making much better points that the first two of us did.
In six minutes all the speaking is done and it is approaching 8 p.m. now. I rush over to the Richardson man and the undecideds, whom I have met and talked with thoroughly while canvassing, and quickly persuade two of the three not to throw their votes away (your candidate must have 15% representation or the votes don't count)
We take another vote:
Clinton: 38 (everyone applauds and I throw in a whistle)
Obama: 35 (same)
Final precinct delegate count: Clinton = 9; Obama = 8.
I am not panicking as I know I am in the Hillary Stronghold precinct for the entire county. I am feeling damn good in fact.
Then the chaos breaks out as the room divides up into camps to choose delegates. After much haggling, headcounting and general disorganization, I am chosen as one of the eight Obama delegates and my husband volunteers as an alternate. We all gather up the names, numbers, and final caucus report figures, deal with resolutions, and adjourn the meeting at 8:59 (the requirement was to adjourn by 9 p.m.). I call our numbers into Obama headquarters at 9: p.m. on the dot.
I figured that we did better than my precinct statewide, but imagine my surprise when I arrived home and found the news reporting a two-thirds Obama landslide in Colorado. I have seen reports of caucuses containing upwards of a hundred people with most or all delegates going to Obama statewide. The reports are still coming in.
Another captain called me a few minutes ago and said that as of about 11 a.m. Obama had more delegates than Clinton nationwide (910 to 882), but the reports are still filtering in....
Okay, I feel better now. Guess I'd better get my butt to work as it is now after noon (I took the morning off to decompress).
____________
I have menopause and a handgun. Any questions?
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted February 06, 2008 09:25 PM |
|
|
Now, Consis...
I know you think your state's temporal positioning in the process makes its participation meaningless.
Let me present a scenario which might prove to you that the opposite could end up being true.
We get to Oregon and Obama and Clinton are neck-in-neck delegate-wise...
Now, get your butt out the door and to your local headquarters and start working. I just told you how to do it, step by step. Every vote -- and I literally mean every vote -- counts. I scraped those Obama people together last night virtually single-handedly. Virtually none of them had ever been to a caucus before and did not even know about it until I told them about it. I hope that you and everyone else realizes how much difference one person can make after reading my story above. You can do it. Anyone can do it if they JUST DO IT.
P.S. Obama on healthcare. You are mistaken that he "does not want" universal healthcare. What he offers is universally available healthcare -- so that it is available to everyone, but not compulsory (freedom of choice). I personally don't think anything should be compulsory in a Democracy.
____________
I have menopause and a handgun. Any questions?
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted February 06, 2008 11:32 PM |
|
Edited by Consis at 23:34, 06 Feb 2008.
|
*clears throat*
Quote:
I personally don't think anything should be compulsory in a Democracy.
*straightens posture* . . . Tell that to the super delegates. For the first time in all of my memory I actually reduced myself to running a Wikipedia search on "Super Delegates". What I read was very disturbing. While watching the news last night(I couldn't sleep because I had to know where California was going) I listened in shock as I heard the newscaster respond to the question:
Questioner: "What do the candidates do to get the support of the super delegates?"
Newscaster: "They call them, usually by phone."
As I sat in my brand new lazyboy recliner my mouth hung open, jaw dropped. I thought to myself, "What? They can't be serious. This must be some kind of joke." But as I and the rest of this blessed country is slowing beginning to realize, it is no joke. This is real.
I simply cant believe the fate of this nation is about to be decided by a handful of people who think they themselves are just so important that their single vote is worth a hundred thousand votes of the average american. That's right I said
1 = 100,000
If ever there was a time we need change, this is it. I have to be honest and say that this new information will influence my vote. I am now rethinking my vote.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 08:06 AM |
|
|
Indeed. Just like the 'electorial colledge' Bush LOST the presidency according to Popular vote. However, because certain states are more 'valuable' (what?! how is one state more valuable then another?!!) he accended to presidency. Something is wrong there. Whoever gets the most people to vote for them should win...period.
Clinton will get the nomination, not because she got the most votes, but because of 'big politics' otherwise known as 'back room politics'. It will be a travesity. No offense meant Minion (since you seem to be a huge Clinton supporter). The only non-status quo thing about Clinton is she is Female. Rich, white, strong political connections, and part of the 'old boys club' (again despite the fact that she is female).
However, the race should be about neither gender or race, but what the country needs. We NEED somebody who isn't the 'status quo'. We NEED somebody to take us in a different direction. We NEED somebody who is a uniter, not a divider. We NEED somebody who can give a message to the world that America might indeed be able to change.
That is why currently I support Obama. Though he seems a bit 'old boys club' he seems less so then Clinton. If Hillary gets the nomination, it will become a choice between : Somebody who polarizes people and divides them, or the status quo. Yay. Some choice.
As for impeaching Bush, I wholeheartedly agree. Not only that, every last law he cast with his 'executive' powers, should be burned, and the ashes scattered to the four winds.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 08:18 AM |
|
Edited by Minion at 08:43, 07 Feb 2008.
|
Quote:
Whoever gets the most people to vote for them should win...period.
Clinton will get the nomination, not because she got the most votes, but because of 'big politics' otherwise known as 'back room politics'.
And which candidate, if I may ask, has won most votes so far?
EDIT: And I wholeheartedly agree that the person getting most votes should win. THAT is how democracy works. I don't see how that is Hillary's fault though, that the system works that way, LOL. After all she has stated the democracy in USA is NOT WORKING. And has introduced the
Count Every Vote Act -
# Provides a paper trail for every vote cast.
# Designates Election Day as a national holiday.
# Allows same-day registration.
# Minimizes long lines at the polls.
# Makes sure that impartial officials administer our elections
Don't know where Obama stands on this issue...
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 08:21 AM |
|
|
Waiting for the results currently. Just a prediction. We shall see.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 12:30 PM |
|
Edited by Minion at 14:30, 07 Feb 2008.
|
Time Magazine has these kinds of results:
Quote:
TOTAL VOTES CAST
Clinton: 50.2% (7,347,971)
Obama: 49.8% (7,294,851)
So talking about her not getting the most votes (so far) is FALSE.
But on a brighter side the story also counted :
Quote:
McCain: 43.1% (3,611,459) Romney: 35.4% (2,961,834) Huckabee: 21.5% (1,796,729)
For grand totals, vastly more Democrats than Republicans voted yesterday; Democratic votes for Clinton and Obama: 14,622,822 (63.6%) Republican votes for McCain, Romney and Huckabee: 8,370,022 (36.4%)
Put another way, the Clinton/Obama race drew 76% more voters than the McCain/Romney/Huckabee race.
Which is positive news for democrats. Unless you hate Hillary for reasons uncomprehensible, and you vote for republicans if the nominee goes to her  To each his/her own 
|
|
OD
Known Hero
or Grizzly Bear?
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 02:47 PM |
|
|
It seems people are forgetting this isn't a democracy. It's a representative republic.
And exactly on what grounds should President Bush be impeached, Misty?
____________
"There is no such thing as a plea of innocence in my court. A plea of innocence is guilty of wasting my time. Guilty."
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 03:21 PM |
|
|
Yeah. And bush actually vetoed far more laws then he created.
I dont see why people think so highly of obama. hes just a high-quality speaker. when you strip that away the only thing that hes going to do is to prove america isnt rascist to blacks. I seriously doubt that there will be any huge change in the way america is run
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 05:02 PM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 17:04, 07 Feb 2008.
|
Mostly for the 'patriot act' laws that he has seen fit to enact. Basically trampling our rights through executive 'privilage'. *shrugs* To each their own again.
Hey, I have my opinons. That is all they are. Opinons. I am not a political analyst, or have much to do with the political landscape at all. Feel free to ignore my opinons, but do not tell me I can not have them. I don't put down something as fact, nor try to claim that it is a fact. It is an opinon.
____________
Message received.
|
|
OD
Known Hero
or Grizzly Bear?
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 05:24 PM |
|
Edited by OD at 18:13, 07 Feb 2008.
|
My apologies Misty. I did not intend any offense by my question.
If I didn't want to know your opinion, I wouldn't have asked for it. I'm just curious about where people are coming from so I can better understand their position.
____________
"There is no such thing as a plea of innocence in my court. A plea of innocence is guilty of wasting my time. Guilty."
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 06:00 PM |
|
|
The poop on superdelegates
Consis --
If it makes you feel any better, here's a history of the superdelegate development (see article below), which was actually a step forward from the previous process (which was completely dominated by big party bosses). The keystone of the superdelegate is to ensure the choice of the candidate who is most electable.
As to who now actually has the "lead" in delegates, there's a few things everyone should keep in mind.
1. While the pre-final count after Super Tuesday leaves Clinton with a whopping 50 - some more delegates out of around 2,000 total (and that's so far -- I think they're still being counted), it's not at all clear that this count does not include the superdelegates who have already endorsed Clinton (knee jerk, perhaps?). [ATTENTION MINION: PLEASE NOTE WHAT I JUST SAID] Those pledged superdelegates include such people as officials from Colorado who are CLEARLY acting against the state's landslide vote in favor of Obama on Tuesday. Those people are now under increasing pressure to vote with their state, not based on some misguided sense of loyalty.
2. The vast majority of superdelegates are withholding their votes for now, and given the original purpose of the superdelegate, will more likely throw their weight behind the candidate they determine is more electable.
3. The current structure of many states does not allow for cross-over votes. So a lot of people who wanted to vote on Tuesday could not, because they were not party-affiliated or were registered with the party opposite the candidate they preferred. Now, who do you think these people are and who do you think they would have voted for it they could? Clinton simply does not have any following of Independents and most of all, Republicans. OBAMA DOES. So the numbers of votes you're seeing for Clinton currently are pretty accurate for the long haul, while the same is clearly not so for Obama. If the Democractic primaries and caucuses were all "open" on Tuesday (meaning that Republicans and Independants could have voted in them) Obama would have taken the country by storm. This makes for a very misleading picture as to how many people will actually support either Clinton or Obama in the general election.
4. The superdelegates know all of the above. It is clear that Obama is the more electable candidate. They know he has a huge moderate/Republican following. They know that all the pundits and political experts are saying the Obama is the only one who can beat McCain, and that McCain will most likely beat Clinton. They further know that if there is one thing that can finally consolidate the GOP (which is currently in a state of dissarray and division between moderate and evangelical Republicans) and surge ahead with unity it would be Clinton on the general election ballot. They can't tolerate her, and neither can half of Congress.
[MORE ONE "WHAT'S SO GREAT ABOUT OBAMA" later...]
________________________________________________
Campaign 2008
Dems may see superdelegate "chaos"
Superdelegates can vote against the tide
By David Olinger and Chuck Plunkett
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 02/07/2008 06:39:31 AM MST
The Democratic duel for the presidential nomination has taken a hard shift from Super Tuesday to the Super Delegate, opening a kind of shadow primary race for the support of hundreds of party elite members.
With Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama fewer than 100 delegates apart in the chase for the Democratic nomination, the party's so-called superdelegates — roughly 20 percent of the total delegates available — are garnering attention from the campaigns.
Consider Colorado's Democratic Party chairwoman, Pat Waak. Chelsea Clinton called her cellphone and home, wanting to talk about Chelsea's mom. Former President Bill Clinton personally asked Waak to support his wife.
Obama supporters found Waak's private e-mail address, urging her to "fight against back-room deals" and support the man who won the Colorado caucuses Tuesday night.
"I'm sure this is just the beginning," Waak said.
There are delegates, and there are superdelegates at Democratic National Conventions.
Voters in state primaries and caucuses choose the delegates. Superdelegates such as Waak — party leaders, members of Congress and other VIPs — get an automatic vote on the convention floor, one that's purely up to them. And for the first time since the Democrats set up this system, they could hold the balance of power.
The close race could mean Denver hosts the ultra-rare brokered convention, although that possibility is still considered a longshot.
And if that were to happen, there is yet another longshot chance that surely chills the hearts of party officials: The winner of the pledged delegates who represent the popular vote loses to the candidate who wins the most superdelegates.
"You would see all kinds of chaos reigning again," said Kenneth Bickers, chairman of political science at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Referring to the bloody riots that occurred outside the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago and the Denver protest group Re-create 68, Bickers said, "The people who want to see what happened in Chicago (happen) in Denver, this would be the force that would do that."
Not about to allow meltdown
However, Bickers and other experts believe the Democrats are too wary of breaking with the popular vote to let such a meltdown take place.
Though hundreds of superdelegates remain uncommitted, Clinton has a clear lead among those who have declared their preferences.
"I would be disturbed if the superdelegates ended up tipping the balance," said Dan Slater, a Colorado superdelegate who favors Obama.
But "if Sen. Obama wins the pledged delegates," he predicted, "the superdelegates will come along."
U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, who represents Denver and supports Clinton, isn't ready to make that pledge.
"I'm not going to speculate about what's going to happen" in that case, she said. "Right now Sen. Clinton is ahead."
But Tuesday, Colorado overwhelmingly went for Obama.
"I'm going to guess that somebody from the Obama campaign is contacting (DeGette's) office and saying, 'Can you move over? Your constituents have voted for Obama. Are you still for Sen. Clinton (while) recognizing your constituents aren't?' " said Robert Eisinger, a political scientist at Lewis & Clark College in Portland, Ore.
DeGette said that she hasn't been called and that her precinct supported Clinton. But the city and county of Denver voted overwhelmingly for Obama.
"In politics, loyalty matters," Eisinger said. "Sometimes loyalty trumps reason."
In Colorado, 14 of 70 people voting on the Democratic nominee are superdelegates, and according to Waak, they will choose a 15th delegate not elected at Tuesday's caucuses.
J.W. Postal, a Democratic National Committee member from Colorado, got a personal call from Bill Clinton at his Colorado business.
"Chelsea Clinton called too," Postal said. "I actually spoke to her, which was sort of surreal. She was very friendly and polite. It was just very odd to be talking to Chelsea Clinton about her mom."
Three other prominent Democrats called Postal from the Obama side, including former Denver Mayor Federico Peña.
No Cabinet jobs were dangled.
"Very honorable people, all calling with a personal appeal," he said. "No heavy-handed stuff at all."
Postal finally went with his "heart" and endorsed Obama.
U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar said he is remaining uncommitted because he wants to maintain strong relationships with the two fellow senators. But if he has to cast a vote at the convention in a still-undecided race, "What will be most important to me is who will be able to win the general election," he said. He hasn't decided who is more electable.
Beauty contests of the past
Before 1968, Bickers said, state primaries and caucuses were nothing more than beauty contests that weren't binding. Nominees were selected by party officials — often described with references to smoke- filled rooms and fat cats.
The system collapsed in 1968, when Hubert Humphrey managed to gather the official nomination without attending a single caucus or primary. There were riots in the host city of Chicago.
Then 1972 brought reforms that created the beginning of the binding primary system, wherein the popular vote creates delegates who are pledged to the winning candidate.
It was in 1984, Bickers said, that the superdelegate was born. Former Vice President Walter Mondale, fearing rising star Gary Hart, a Colorado senator who was mounting a celebrated run, used his establishment connections to create the unpledged delegate. The argument given was that party leaders needed a say in picking a nominee with "electability."
Leah Daughtry, the chief executive of the Democratic National Convention Committee, said she has contingency plans in the case of a brokered convention but hopes those plans won't be needed.
She and party chairman Howard Dean have said they'd rather focus on spotlighting a clear nominee than wrangling with a floor fight.
Chuck Plunkett: 303-954-1333 or cplunkett@denverpost.com
Superdelegate battle
Who: A superdelegate is a Democratic Party representative who carries an independent vote going into a national convention. He or she can be a former elected, or party, official or a current officeholder. A superdelegate is not bound to vote in line with party primary elections or caucus decisions.
How many: The Democratic Party has just fewer than 800 superdelegates headed to the Democratic National Convention in Denver. The exact number of superdelegates is fluid until March 1. They will account for about 20 percent of delegate voting at the convention.
The GOP: The Republicans give each state and protectorate three unpledged delegates: the state party chair, a committeeman and a committeewoman. Also, there are some GOP state parties, such as Colorado's, whose primaries or caucuses are meant to guide pledged delegates but do not bind them to the popular vote.
History: In 1984, Walter Mondale persuaded the Democratic Party to create superdelegates while running as the party's establishment candidate. The Republican system evolved after reforms in both parties in 1972.
Why: Democrats banned winner- takes-all contests in the 1980s to apportion support so that underdog candidates had a fighting chance. But the invention also shelters party front-runners from being overwhelmed by unknown candidates who surge from behind. The real aim is to head off protracted fights on the convention floor, keeping some power for party insiders.
Colo. superdelegates
Democrats
For Hillary Rodham Clinton:
House Rep. Diana DeGette
DNC member Maria Handley of Lafayette
DNC member and former Denver City Council President Ramona Martinez
DNC member Mannie Rodriguez of Denver
For Barack Obama:
House Rep. Ed Perlmutter
DNC member Dan Slater of Cañon City
DNC member Debbie Marquez of Edwards
DNC member J.W. Postal
Uncommitted:
House Rep. Mark Udall
House Rep. John Salazar
Sen. Ken Salazar
Gov. Bill Ritter
Former Gov. Roy Romer
State party chairwoman Pat Waak
Republicans
Uncommitted:
State party chairman Dick Wadhams
GOP state committeeman Bob Schaffer (faces re-election process this summer)
GOP state committeewoman Lilly Nunez (faces re-election process this summer)
The remaining 43 delegates aren't bound by Tuesday's caucuses.
Sources: Politico; The New York Times; The Seattle Times; CU-Boulder. Compiled by Vickie Makings of the Denver Post Research Library
____________
I have menopause and a handgun. Any questions?
|
|
OD
Known Hero
or Grizzly Bear?
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 08:01 PM |
|
|
And then there were 4.
Romney just dropped out.
____________
"There is no such thing as a plea of innocence in my court. A plea of innocence is guilty of wasting my time. Guilty."
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 08:07 PM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 20:08, 07 Feb 2008.
|
I vote for Obama. Why? Because I think he's capable of the job. I think he's capable of turning this country around into the positive direction, but most of all, because I want the white house to be the race free house. I am tired of the white man basicly ruling the country, when plenty of people who are black are positive individuals. Hilary on the otherhand, I would never vote for. I would vote for a woman, but not her. Her immediate family pardoned hardened crooks for money. Bill, the scumbag with a few good concepts to look good in front of the camera. But thats not the only reason I wouldnt vote for her... I wont go into it.
I'm white if anyone wondered.
Go Obama
____________
What are you up to
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 10:02 PM |
|
|
I'm unusual in this respect. I like Bill Clinton. I think he did a lot of good things for this country. He passed NAFTA. He shrunk the size of government (correctly, not the way the conservatives want to do it). He gave us a budget surplus, which Bush somehow used up and gave us a huge budget defecit.
Yet I don't support Hillary. Why?
1. She voted for the war in Iraq.
2. She is against free trade.
3. She voted for the PATRIOT Act.
4. She wants universal health care. And not only does she want universal health care, but her health care plan is probably the worst one out there.
So I'm supporting Obama among the Democrats.
Vote for Obama to promote Bill Clinton's policies!
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 10:51 PM |
|
Edited by Consis at 22:57, 07 Feb 2008.
|
It Seems....
Quote:
Before 1968, Bickers said, state primaries and caucuses were nothing more than beauty contests that weren't binding. Nominees were selected by party officials — often described with references to smoke- filled rooms and fat cats. The system collapsed in 1968, when Hubert Humphrey managed to gather the official nomination without attending a single caucus or primary. There were riots in the host city of Chicago. Then 1972 brought reforms that created the beginning of the binding primary system, wherein the popular vote creates delegates who are pledged to the winning candidate. It was in 1984, Bickers said, that the superdelegate was born. Former Vice President Walter Mondale, fearing rising star Gary Hart, a Colorado senator who was mounting a celebrated run, used his establishment connections to create the unpledged delegate. The argument given was that party leaders needed a say in picking a nominee with "electability."
So it begins.....Both I and the rest of the nation is now forced to face this age old debate: Should America be a two-party system? If so then why and how can it be made to succeed for all the right reasons?
To be honest with you I never wanted to visit this debate. I grew up thinking that democracy was fair and just. But all I've learned is that democracy is a flawed invention of mankind. I have learned that democracy is not a naturally occuring thing. But still I am convinced that individualism is the key to a successful society. The question remains, "How do we successfully make a democratic society based on individualism?" Yet here we are....faced with the most basic human flaw inherent in all things related to the spirit of man: Power and Corruption.
But wait, I have also looked at the other governments of the world and do still believe in the American way of life. What we are most famous for is our ability to make changes when they are needed. In no other country of the world is change so inherently capable. And not just any change, but the right sort of change. The kind of change we can use to press forward in a sea of hatred. This is the change of boldness. To be brave in your wish to give even the lowliest impoverished person a voice of their own. I like what we've done with the place. And although others can visit our house, look around and see everything that's wrong with us: the floors are dirty, the dishes aren't done, the trash hasn't been well cared for.......despite all this when you come into our house you have a voice all your own that no one can ever take from you. No matter what country you come from, in this world on this green earth, when you step one foot into America you have rights. We are a nation that has rules of moral guidance. We have beliefs that make us better because there are certain laws we proudly wear on our sleeves, beliefs such as those that we would contain our wrath no matter what dreadful debaucle lays waste on us. We believe in a higher power; we believe in ourselves that we can each change the world and make it a better place.
I love Hillary with all my heart. I know what people are saying about her and I know it's just not true. She is a good person who is masterfully intelligent and crafty in the most remarkable and brilliant way. Were she ever to come within ten feet of me I would tip my hat and offer a trusty handshake. Were she ever my president I would swear my allegiance with unfailing loyalty. I know this person could affect the greatest change where it is needed the most: Healthcare.
But I cannot support a candidate who would seek to empower or gain control of this nation by sucking up to a handful of people who think they are better than everyone else. I see her doing this and I do not see Obama doing this. I have changed my vote to Obama based on this man's ability to refrain from kissing the feet of those nauseating filthy rich politicians who think they are better than everyone else.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 11:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But I cannot support a candidate who would seek to empower or gain control of this nation by sucking up to a handful of people who think they are better than everyone else.
So the elected officials of democratic party are people who think that they are better than anyone else? Why do you vote for a democrat then in the first place...
And this "sucking" is this based on what exactly? That currently she has more superdelegates at her side?
|
|
Miru
Supreme Hero
A leaf in the river of time
|
|
posted February 07, 2008 11:32 PM |
|
|
Technically, Stephen Colbert (Independant), is running for president and if I were old enough I would vote for him.
Why?
All the Democratic candidates are air-heads, and all the Republican candidates are greedy bastards.
____________
I wish I were employed by a stupendous paragraph, with capitalized English words and expressions.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
