Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LiberalFighter

(50,950 posts)
Wed Aug 29, 2018, 10:30 AM Aug 2018

Are Democrats Courting Chaos In 2020 By Limiting The Power Of Superdelegates?

A FiveThirtyEight Chat

perry: If Sanders or another candidate who is anti-superdelegates does not win a majority of pledged delegates during the primary, he should be worried. I wonder if the supers, on the second ballot, are even more unbound under this new system, compared to the old one. They could say, “You [Sanders’ supporters] said you wanted a system in which a majority of pledged delegates means you win. You didn’t get a majority. We get to intervene now. These are your rules. We are following them and we will now choose who WE want.”


natesilver: Yeah. My thing is that you want a system where someone can win on the first ballot with less than a majority, but with a reasonably clear plurality. Because it’s very common for the top candidate to have something like 35 percent to 45 percent of the overall votes in the primary.

There are two ways to achieve that: either through superdelegates or through winner-take-all/winner-take-most rules.

The Democrats have neither one of those now.
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Are Democrats Courting Chaos In 2020 By Limiting The Power Of Superdelegates? (Original Post) LiberalFighter Aug 2018 OP
It's done, superdelegates never decided anything anyway, let's move on. If we want to rage about Squinch Aug 2018 #1
agreed NewJeffCT Aug 2018 #5
It was a mistake to eliminate them. NurseJackie Aug 2018 #2
Well, they were the response to a couple of terrible losses to Republicans that could have Squinch Aug 2018 #3
I think they'll eventually return. NurseJackie Aug 2018 #6
Everything will be just fine. irresistable Aug 2018 #4
You can't win with these M$M fucks BannonsLiver Aug 2018 #7
This could be a big mess Gothmog Aug 2018 #8

Squinch

(50,955 posts)
1. It's done, superdelegates never decided anything anyway, let's move on. If we want to rage about
Wed Aug 29, 2018, 11:02 AM
Aug 2018

something, it should be to outlaw caucuses and require tax returns.

NewJeffCT

(56,828 posts)
5. agreed
Wed Aug 29, 2018, 11:07 AM
Aug 2018

Obama supporters complained about superdelegates supporting Clinton in 2008 just like Sanders supporters did in 2016. Neither really played a role since the issue was decided through "regular" delegates

Squinch

(50,955 posts)
3. Well, they were the response to a couple of terrible losses to Republicans that could have
Wed Aug 29, 2018, 11:05 AM
Aug 2018

been avoided, so I thought they were a good idea. But here we are.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
6. I think they'll eventually return.
Wed Aug 29, 2018, 11:19 AM
Aug 2018

After a massive and avoidable "told you fucking so" event... but, we'll just have to wait and see and hope for the best.

Yep, "here we are". Let's try to make the best of it.

BannonsLiver

(16,396 posts)
7. You can't win with these M$M fucks
Wed Aug 29, 2018, 11:27 AM
Aug 2018

Narrative: Dems must get rid of super delegates they are unfair!1!1

Dems get rid of super delegates.

Narrative: But will it cause chaos!?11?1

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are Democrats Courting Ch...