Delegates of Steel - A review of the history of superdelegates

[groovedaddy]

THE Democratic presidential nomination battle is virtually dead even between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. And while Senator Obama has moved ahead in recent days, neither is likely to come close to the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination from the pledged delegates they are awarded in primaries and caucuses. So the key to victory is in the 796 votes given to so-called superdelegates, the elected and party officials — members of the Democratic National Committee, Democratic members of the House and Senate and others with automatic status under the party rules. Superdelegates are free agents, able to switch their endorsements or commitments at any time.

No one expected that this year’s Democratic race would evolve this way. But now that it looks as if the nomination battle could go on for months, conceivably all the way to the convention, a reaction against superdelegates has begun. Donna Brazile, a commentator, long-time party strategist and superdelegate herself, told CNN, “If 795 of my colleagues decide this election, I will quit the Democratic Party.” Gary Hart, the former senator and presidential candidate, recently declared that the influence of the superdelegates “should be curtailed.”

These reactions reflect in part a legitimate concern that heavy-handed lobbying of the superdelegates might reverse the outcome of the contest for pledged delegates in the primaries and caucuses. But a review of the history of superdelegates suggests they are likely to play a constructive role in resolving the nomination before the convention and in unifying the party for the general election campaign.

Superdelegates were created by the Hunt Commission, set up in 1982 and led by Gov. James Hunt of North Carolina. The commission was reacting in part to a nominating process in which the weight of influence was with a relatively small cadre of ideological activists whose involvement with the party was essentially limited to the once-every-four-years push to nominate a like-minded presidential candidate. Their influence coincided with election losses in 1972 and 1980, when Jimmy Carter’s re-election effort was crimped by a draining primary challenge from the left.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/opinion/15mann.html?th&emc=th

[Ano Genitus]

1. The plain truth:

A Man of Steel is Quick of Heart and Hand
A Man of Steel is Loved Throught the Land.
His Hands Are Quick and Will Not Let You Go
His Burning Lovelock Will Clasp You Head to Toe

A Man of Steel Will Never Let You Go
His Quick, Quick Hands Will Hold On To Friend And Foe
There Is No Way You Can Squirm Out From His Grasp
Those Hands Are Made Of Steel And They Are Very Fast

[Alcibiades]

2. Ideological activists

I hate those ideological activists who insist on being involved with presidential politics! How dare they! They shouldn't be involved with the party only every four years. They should be out writing checks every minute of every day.

I suspect these people are, in fact, average Americans who have a deep commitment to politics but who have lives outside of the political process, and have a damned insistence on doing things (work, family) between elections. Apparently, some folks would rather have it be the case that only professional politicians and their staffs, lobbyists and hangers-on have any say whatsoever.