Scenario - pledged delegates and superdelegates

[dmallind]

Given how delegates are assigned I can very easily see the following scenario being true:

Candidate A has slightly more pledged delegates than candidate B

Candidate B however received slightly more votes from primary and caucus participants

Superdelegates can swing the nomination either way.

Which is the right way to go? Can you answer consistently regardless of who is A and who is B? If not why not?

[Uben]

1. I don't get it

Why don't we just go with the popular vote? Whoever gets the most votes, wins. Why have delegates or electorates. It might have been necessary at the time, but is it now?

[mohc]

2. Because of caucus states

If every state held a primary, I suppose looking at popular votes would make sense. But there are so many caucus states, and the vote numbers there are quite different and not really comparable, and in the case of some states they do not even report the "popular" vote counts for caucuses.

[pampango]

4. Reminds me of the Electoral College problem.

If you structure your campaign to win in the Electoral College, you target swing states and pay little attention to red and blue states.

Since both camps have targeted electing delegates, winning the popular vote being a side goal, in their campaign strategies, to change the rules at the end and declare the winner based on another metric, would not be very fair. It would be like telling to football teams that the final score would determine the winner, than after the game, announcing that it is actually total yards gained by each team that will be used to judge the winning team.

Having said that, I realize that most of us look at a proposal such as this and our first thought is "Does it benefit my candidate?", not "Is this the fairest way to do it?" If our0 candidate benefits from using elected delegates as a metric but not popular vote, guess which one most would tend to support? While if our candidate benefits from the popular vote as the measure of success, most of us would try to perform a backflip (without killing ourselves). ;)

[TexasObserver]

3. Unless they are retiring, superdelegates care about the ballot

If you are a congressperson, you care about how YOUR district voted or caucused. If YOUR district went 60% for Obama, you'd have to be in idiot to back Clinton at the convention, because to do so will alienate your home voters. If they turn on you, you're done. For that reason, we can expect 90% of the superdelegates to vote their best interests, as reflected in how the candidates did in their district or other home unit.

These are PARTY animals. Not like in college, like in Democratic Party. They want the party to succeed. If they think Obama will lift the tickets locally, they'll back him. If they think Hillary is a weight that will pull down local candidates, they won't back her.

He's an asset down ticket. She's a liability. That's why I expect the superDs to go Obama.

[ozone_man]

5. You can't go by popular vote

because of fluctuations in turn out. Suppose there is a bad weather (blizzard) day in the North and few voters turn out. Or a tornadoe in the South that prevents voters from making it to the polls. You have to go state by state.

The same reasoning applies within a state. There may be fluctuations in turnout within the state due to many variables. Media events may cause people to turn out where they have had a lot of exposure to campaigns, but not so much where the media or campaigners don't reach.

I think the delegate system is best. Eliminate super delegates though. That is totally undemocratic. An attempt by part hacks to control the process.

[mrJJ]

6. Primary must be won outright

Major problem... a once in a life time chance for either of the candidates to be the FIRST.

First President of Color whoose supporters mandate that their candidate tries to change the way politics are played in our USA

First Female President of an ex impeached President ... sorry couldnt help myself

No ones going to give ... This MUST be won outright in the primary by either candidate.

But will the superdelegates at the convention decide to subvert the efforts of the movement for change? I have a feeling the fix is already in.

I submit that Billary 08 will cajole or pigeon hole his former party member underlings to "follow your old leader". Loyalty to the party must trump the mandate for change. Besides new and fresh ideas are bad, scarry... The old ways are the best, stay with what we have. Paranoid? Conspiracy? No... If Sen Obama's supporters thinks he was not given a fair playing field to compete on.. these will be some of the talking points.

When that happens.... and I submit that it will. All bets will be off. Does anyone think that these newley registered and independent voters are card carrying "My democratic party right or wrong.. follow me" types? Sen Obama being a Party loyalist will make the plea to his supporters to unite behind Billary 08... my guess is that few will follow...