I was going to post something trenchant today but I've had a couple students and a commenter ask me what in the flying hell a "Superdelegate" is and why they are suddenly important. If you really want to know, let's take a tour into the grimy fine print of the Democratic Party's internal rules governing nominations. Superdelegates (that's a media term; they're actually called uncommitted or unpledged delegates) have been in place for 40 years but have never mattered. Now they might. So I suspect a lot of America, media and candidates included, are suddenly scrambling to learn the rules. Believe it or not, what you are about to read is the short version.
buy doxycycline online buy doxycycline no prescription
First, some history.
Prior to 1970 the presidential nominees were chosen by delegates at the national conventions. And by "chosen by delegates" I mean they were chosen by the delegates. At the convention. Not in primaries. A few states held primaries but they were simply popularity contests – the candidates tried to show off their electability to the delegates. So who were these delegates? Insiders. Party insiders. Each state chose a delegation to attend the convention composed entirely of local party bosses, state party chairmen, and so on.
Then the debacle of 1968 came along and America got to watch the Democratic Party douse itself in gas and light a match. On national television. Despite the fact that the 1968 primaries were contested among Eugene McCarthy, RFK (until he was shot, of course), and in the late stages, George McGoven, the convention delegates' infinite wisdom saw fit to nominate incumbent VP Hubert Humphrey. In short, the "insider" system highlighted how removed from reality the delegates could be and how little grasp they had on which candidates the party faithful supported.
In the wake of this disaster the Democratic Party instituted the reforms of the McGovern-Fraser commission, empaneled to fix the nominating process. The major reform was, obviously, the decision to award delegates to candidates based on the result of state-by-state primaries and caucuses. These are referred to as committed delegates. They are awarded proportionally. So, in a simplified example, if Iowa has 10 delegates and the results are Clinton 50%, Obama 30%, and Edwards 20%, they get 5, 3, and 2 delegates respectively. These delegate MUST vote for said candidate at the convention (unless, as usually happens, the losing candidates quit and ask their delegates to support the frontrunner).
BUT. McGovern-Fraser reforms didn't totally eliminate the privileged position enjoyed by DNC members and other party honchos. They created a separate category of delegates who are uncommitted. Their votes at the convention do not in any way have to relate to the primaries – just like in the old days. Approximately 18% of the ~4000 delegates (changes regularly but is always in this ballpark) are uncommitted delegates, a.k.a. Superdelegates.
Who in the hell cooked up this arcane system and why? Simple – avoid at all costs the televised meltdown/free-for-all of 1968. By making 1 in 5 delegates uncommitted, they are absolutely guaranteeing that someone will get a decisive majority at the convention. The Superdelegates were originally intended to act in unison to break ties or create a majority when none exists. Of course, being uncommitted they don't have to do so. They can do whatever they damn well please.
So. Where does this leave us for 2008? Assume that Obama and Clinton will continue to essentially split things in the primaries. In theory, that will leave it to the Superdelegates. Advantage? Clinton. These people are the inside-iest of insiders. DNC folks. Fund raisers. In other words, the kind of people who'd have personal connections to and favor someone with decades of deep roots in the Party. While Obama was a nobody state senator 6 years ago, HRC has been one of the five heaviest hitters in the Democratic apparatus for two decades.
Why does Ed think it won't come to this? Obama is not stupid, and he knows which direction the winds blow with the Superdelegates.
buy zovirax online buy zovirax no prescription
And both candidates are bright enough to realize how much of an advantage the GOP will have if Obama and Clinton continue to grind away at each other until the very end of the primary season (May). The insiders will sit down with Obama for the Here's Reality speech. He'll realize that the overwhelming balance of the uncommitted delegates are essentially Clinton delegates, and he will yield from the race in return for some sort of concession.
VP? I doubt it. Obama loathes the Clintons and vice-versa.
But one never knows.
If you want to see who the Superdelegates are, look here. I can guarantee you that you've not heard of more than a handful of them (the ex-presidents, for example). Note that the nomination rules are set by the parties and none of what you've just read is true of the GOP. They voluntarily adopted some McGovern-Fraser reforms and instituted primaries/caucuses in place of the old convention system, but they did not adopt all of the proposed changes. They do have a small number of unpledged delegates but their purpose and manner of selection are different.
So that's a Superdelegate. With wicked mad skills like this, I can't imagine why women do not flock to me.