Sunday, April 24, 2016

Somebody is really worried that Sanders will try to flip superdelegates in July

There are a few articles popping up here and there about this idea that Sanders is far enough behind that he's planning on trying to flip superdelegates at the convention. A few people are concerned that if Sanders did that, why, he'd be working against the will of the people. Here's an insightful example:
In other words, Clinton might still be able to claim the most number of popular votes. She might be able to claim the most pledged delegates. She might be the top choice among voters. But because the superdelegates are not bound to obey voters’ preferences, Sanders might convince them to abandon Clinton — and the voters — and switch to his side.
So let's talk about the will of the people.

Here's a handy chart to show how the delegates are distributed. There are several patterns to observe here. Take for example, Vermont. This is Sanders' home state and he cleaned Clinton's clocks there. Yet, somehow, Clinton still managed to bag 3 superdelegates. In all cases the superdelegates are not proportionately split based on the vote and they are most decidedly in Clinton's favor. Even where the vote is close in the primary election, Clinton gets the majority of superdelegates.

Yet, no one in the mainstream media is accusing Clinton of lobbying superdelegates against the vote of the people.

Now take a good look at California way down at the bottom of the list as they are next to last in the primary season. 48 superdelegates have already expressed support for Clinton and the vote isn't even until June. Is that an expression of the will of the people? I don't think so. Maybe we should get their names so that we know who they are come the convention. We wouldn't want them getting re-elected now would we? I mean, if they're going to pledge support so long before the primary election, they're pledging support without knowing what the will of the people is, right?

This idea that any effort to lobby superdelegates at the convention against the will of the people is being used as a double standard. It's a convenient smear that works well if you have a lead for now and want to minimize the damage your opponent is already doing to you. You know, bringing up large speaker fees in the middle of a public debate can really hurt your standing in the remaining elections.

But one thing is clear, the superdelegates don't actually vote until the convention. The mainstream media loves to count them because it helps their cause - keeping the status quo. These suiperdelegates won't really count until the convention, no matter what they say. If Sanders turns up at the convention with a lead in the popular vote, and a lead in pledged delegates, the superdelegates won't have much choice in the matter of voting for a nominee. Why not?

Because there is a large contingent of Democrats that just joined the party to vote for Sanders. And there is an even larger contingent of independent voters who will see right through all of those superdelegates who still manage to find the gall to vote for Hilary - if Sanders prevails in the battle for pledged delegates.

Hilary had a large lead in the polls last year, more than 50 points. That's now down to just a few points between them in national polling after spending $153 million on the campaign. If that's the best she can do with a deep and wide network of media and political supporters, it's hard to believe that the trend will not continue. Already, this could be counted as a monumental failure to communicate her message to the voters. Given the trends, I doubt she will find the nomination waiting for her at the convention.

Few people understand the depths of the hypocrisy of the Clinton campaign on this issue of lobbying superdelegates against the will of the people until they see that Hilary bought insurance. "What kind of insurance?", you might ask. Margot Kidder (yes, *that* Margot Kidder) wrote a very interesting article on that very subject. Last August at the Democratic Convention (I guess they hold them in off years, too), Hilary Clinton arranged with the DNC to funnel money from big donors in big bundles to the DNC and then to various elected officials through the Democratic parties in at least 33 states. Many of those elected officials are superdelegates that now steadfastly support her because she helped fund their campaigns for re-election.

Kidder has written an informative an lucid article that blows away any notion of superdelegates voting the will of the people. And right now, there are more than 500 superdelegates that are breathless in their support of Hilary for President. But the Clinton campaign didn't tell you that most of those superdelegates were bought, did they?

Do you still feel like Clinton is going to win the nomination? I don't. I really don't see how Clinton can win an honest election at this point.
Post a Comment