Big Bernie Win: DNC to Reduce "Super Delegates" by 60%

[Rational Poster]

Start over, and make sense. There would be the same total number of delegates, but more would be regular delegates that you win by votes, or by caucus.

Again, you're just assuming those now regular delegates would have been in areas that Bernie won instead of areas that Hillary won.

 

[Jack V Savage]

But why? What about lessening the super delegates would lead to that? Right wing and left wing media are vastly different. Why would having more pledged delegates from voting and caucusing lead to worse decision making by left leaning voters all of a sudden?

It's removing a sanity check from the process. That's what Republicans have been doing since Nixon really, though it accelerated more recently. By itself, it's a small step in a bad direction, but if there's some kind of populist revolution, I think the country is seriously fucked given that the other party has already destroyed itself intellectually with that kind of thing.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Start over, and make sense. There would be the same total number of delegates, but more would be regular delegates that you win by votes, or by caucus.

the 400 remaining theoretically would just be split to states based on current ratios -- why do you think they would go to states Bernard won?

 

[HomerThompson]

It's removing a sanity check from the process. That's what Republicans have been doing since Nixon really, though it accelerated more recently. By itself, it's a small step in a bad direction, but if there's some kind of populist revolution, I think the country is seriously fucked given that the other party has already destroyed itself intellectually with that kind of thing.

I disagree that it's a sanity check. It's a check on Democracy, in a place that doesn't need it.

 

[VivaRevolution]

This would be a definite step in the right direction, reducing "super-delegates" from 20% of votes determining the Democratic nominee in 2016 to just 8% in 2020.

This change is proposed by the DNC Unity Reform Commission, which was set up after the 2016 primary election to try "unite the party" (keep Bernie Sanders supporters). The Commission is made up of 21 members: 10 who were appointed by Clinton, 8 appointed by Sanders, and 3 appointed by (DNC chair) Tom Perez. The Commission also recommended requiring all 50 states to allow same-day party affiliation switches, essentially making all Democratic primaries "open."

The DNC Rules and Bylaws committee still has to vote on whether or not to accept the Commission's recommendations.

Sanders said he was "extremely pleased" by the commission's work, adding, "Now it is incumbent on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws committee and the membership of the DNC to enact these critical reforms as soon as possible."


https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/sweet-democratic-party-superdelegates-wont-be-so-super-in-2020/

Well, one step in the right direction.

Now, how about we end closed primaries, and stop treating the DNC like a private country club.

 

[HomerThompson]

the 400 remaining theoretically would just be split to states based on current ratios -- why do you think they would go to states Bernard won?

Look at his initial claim(@Rational Poster), and get back to me. Also, show me where I said he would have won. I'll wait.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

they clearly can't defend their actions last election, so there's virtually zero chance the commission doesn't approve this right?

 

[HomerThompson]

Well, one step in the right direction.

Now, how about we end closed primaries, and stop treating the DNC like a private country club.

It actually mentions ending closed primaries as one of the things to be voted on.

 

[HomerThompson]

Again, you're just assuming those now regular delegates would have been in areas that Bernie won instead of areas that Hillary won.

Show me where I assumed this.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I disagree that it's a sanity check. It's a check on Democracy, in a place that doesn't need it.

Somewhat. Representative democracy, still, though.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Look at his initial claim(@Rational Poster), and get back to me. Also, show me where I said he would have won. I'll wait.

I didnt say you said he wouldve won -- try reading.


His claim is that under the proposed redistribution of super delegates Hillary would still win -- he's right. Your claim is that it wouldve helped bernie -- which is somewhat true if you think increasing the score of the loser helps if they still dont actually win. Its not horseshoes, being close doesnt give you points.

 

[VivaRevolution]

This change wouldn't have helped Bernie at all last election.

Strongly disagree that it's a move in the right direction. Democrats should look at what happened to Republicans and realize that their advantage is not superior voters but superior institutions and earned trust in those institutions.

Keep pretending that the media counting those superdelegates for clinton, and saying over and over, that Bernie couldn't win, wasn't meant to depress voter turnout for Bernie.

Maybe the uninformed rubes will buy it

 

[VivaRevolution]

It actually mentions ending closed primaries as one of the things to be voted on.

Really?

Ok, going to read it now.

 

[Lavalamp]

Why don’t they remove super delegates completely?

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Will Bernie try running for President in 2020?

 

[HomerThompson]

Not less total delegates, less super delegates. They would apportion the delegates to the primary vote. So, more delegates up for grabs in the voting and caucusing. Also, she wouldn't have been presented as having this big lead the whole time, because she wouldn't have had a built in advantage. That's huge psychologically to voters.

I think Bernie would have pulled it off, and beat Trump by 3-5 points in a comfortable General Election win.

I didnt say you said he wouldve won -- try reading.


His claim is that under the proposed redistribution of super delegates Hillary would still win -- he's right. Your claim is that it wouldve helped bernie -- which is somewhat true if you think increasing the score of the loser helps if they still dont actually win. Its not horseshoes, being close doesnt give you points.

He claimed it would have made no difference. Then, you claimed that I was assuming that all of the reapportioned delegates would've gone to Bernie. I never made that claim, and I disagree that it would make no difference.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Will Bernie try running for President in 2020?

I'm starting to think he is. I think he would be more visible in the media, if he wasn't.

The idea basically being that he is the most popular politician in the country, and media exposure could only hurt that.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

He claimed it would have made no difference. Then, you claimed that I was assuming that all of the reapportioned delegates would've gone to Bernie. I never made that claim, and I disagree that it would make no difference.

what difference -- she still would've won.

Ok, the gap may've been closer on voted delegates -- but she still would of won non super delegates and the remaining 300 SD's would've gone to the leader as they always do.

Rational was right in his analysis (just slightly off on the math)

 

[Devout Pessimist]

I'm starting to think he is. I think he would be more visible in the media, if he wasn't.

The idea basically being that he is the most popular politician in the country, and media exposure could only hurt that.

Bernie might have a decent chance. People know who he is and there is enough anti-Trump sentiment that he might win on the simple fact that he is not Trump.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Why don’t they remove super delegates completely?

As a check against running an unqualified Candidate -- dont let the rhetoric fool you, democrats would absolutely vote for a celebrity.