Stephanie knows best. At least, she thinks so.
From today’s Rapid City Journal:
The superdelegate system that the Democratic Party put in place after 1972 to save itself from the humiliation of another McGovern-sized presidential defeat is causing the party new headaches in 2008.
and…
But 35 years later, many Democratic voters in South Dakota are outraged by a system they feel subverts the wishes of the electorate and presupposes that party insiders and politicians know better than they do.
That outrage was directed at Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin after she announced she would cast her superdelegate convention vote for Barack Obama, despite the 10-point victory that South Dakota Democrats gave to Hillary Clinton on June 3. Her fellow superdelegate and another Obama supporter, Sen. Tim Johnson, on the other hand, promised to abide by the results of the state primary and vote for Clinton, unless released by her.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Tomorrow night all this will be moot.
“Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside
And it is ragin’.
It’ll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’.
Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin’.
Please get out of the new one
If you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’.”
Bob Dylan
Who’s more smug, Steph or Mikey R.? I’m going w/Mike R.
Who’s smarter? No one will argue that one at least.
Who’s got a chance of beating Stephanie in a state wide race, Joel D. or Pat P… Neither.
So Nick, what will you do? The D voters in the LD you hope to represent clearly preferred Clinton.
once again, what’s so hard to understand about this? the supers can go with public opinion, or go with their personal opinions as party leaders. it’s completely up to them. if they happen to be elected officials, then they have to be prepared to take the consequences. i have no doubt steph is fully aware of this.
to anonymous @ 2:24. actually, she probably has a lot of information about the inner workings of the party that us common folk have no way of knowing. that doesn’t make us stupid, it just is what it is.
get over it.
PP- you missed the best quote from Stephanie on this. I saw the following yesterday on Keloland.com:
“Herseth Sandlin had endorsed Obama and said she’s not switching. She says superdelegates are a lot like expert witnesses in a trial who can offer advice based on experience.”
With all due respect to the Representative, who I must admit I truly like as a person, I must say: What the hell?! Last time I tried a case, the expert witnesses only expressed opinions to the jury. The jurors are free to accept or reject those opinions. The expert witnesses do not testify and then jump into the jury box along with the twelve jurors and cast a vote on the verdict. In other words, it’s the difference between suggesting or recommending that the decision-makers vote for a particular candidate (a/k/a an endorsement) and actually voting for that candidtate at the convention. Superdelegates don’t offer advice or opinions, they actually get to vote and unlike the mere mortal “regular” delegates, they are beholden to no candidate or the lowly voters who literally elect the delegates to the convention.
I find the irony of the situation more than a little amusing. It’s rather like a little Electoral College situation, isn’t it? The main difference is, this process wasn’t cooked up by the same guys wearing powdered wigs who founded the other principles and processes of our democracy, but rather by Democratic Party elite who wanted to make certain that the poor dumb schmuck voters didn’t go nominate the wrong candidate. This, to me, has always been a hallmark of how certain elitist Democrats think their party and the country should be run. It’s the we-know-better-than-you-do approach.
Only time will tell if the times truly are a changing, as BF suggests. There is still plenty of room for the Democrats to run the Obama train right off the tracks.
And to you, BF.
I think I am going to listen to a Bob Dylan song and call it a day.
Anon #3, I disagree.
I believe PP would make a very good showing against Stephanie. He’s got broader statewide appeal than he does in just district 7.
I hope he runs.
The whole superdelegate mechanism is undemocratic, and I think it is hilarious that the Democrats have such a process.
It is typical of the Democrats. They CLAIM to be the party of the masses, but their entire philosophy is premised on the notion that the masses are TOO STUPID to take care of themselves – they need some group of educated elites to take care of them. In this case, it is the superdelegates. Stephanie said it herself – they allow supposed “experts” to ignore the will of the voters. Her analogy to expert witnesses at trial is terrible, for the reason stated. The jury (regular people) gets to decide whether or not to listen to the experts.
grudz… actually, I think you may have a point there.
Sometimes we set our sites to low, you know?
Why not go for all the marbles?
PP indeed has a statewide vibe.
He should do something with it.
Maybe a pizza thing with lexrex and Guy Joi deVive (or whatever his name was…Smile-athon, Funmeister, Happylap, Giggles, hey, I forget.)
Oh yeah Guy Smiley.
Let’s not get all partisan and sanctimonious Chris. Remember which party allocates delegates based upon percentage of the vote in every state. That means that both Barack and Hillary get a proportionate share of pledged delegates in every state where they competed.
On the other hand, the Republicans have a winner-takes-all delegates system in a lot of states that totally disenfranchises a large percentage of the voters in some states. New Jersey, New York, Florida – McCain got all of the delegates and nobody else got any. South Carolina, McCain got 33% of the vote (while Huckabee got 30%)and McCain ended up with 19 delegates while Huckabee got only 5 delegates and nobody else got any.
So Chris, if you want to talk about party elites making sure that poor dumb schmuck voters don’t nominate the wrong candidate, take a good look at your own party’s rules. You party totally disenfranchises over 40% of the voters in a whole bunch of big states. But you don’t have to take my word for it – it’s there for all to see on cnn.com.
Further, the Republican winner-take-all scheme is designed to force candidates out of the race early so that later primaries will be meaningless and voters in later states won’t be heard. It worked perfectly this year. If the GOP had proportionate delegate allocation, would more candidates have stayed in longer? I think the answer to that is obvious.
It seems to me that both parties have rules that deviate from the popular vote. The Democratic Party tries harder than the Republican Party to approximate the popular vote in its delegate allocation.
For Republicans to get all self righteous here is pretty hypocritical.
I think Herseth made the best decision. She’s going with who she thinks is the best candidate for President. Tim Johnson is endorsing Clinton not because he believes she’ll be the best candidate, but because that’s how our vote turned out. I’d rather the superdelegates use their brains to tell us who they, in all the experience, think would be the best candidate.
We didn’t elect robots… well, the jury is still out on Rounds.
Did Tim actually make a decision or did his staff???? How long did it take him to make it if it was his????
Rich Engels makes good points.
Proportional representation balanced a bit with some “Super Delegates” is a compromise system much like the federal system.
No matter what the Republican system looks like, it is a top-down manipulated system. How else could they end up with a dolt like Bush?
Rich Engels, you may have unknowingly showed everyone that the Republican Party IS a party of the people. The Republican National party not only doesn’t have the large numbers of unelected persons serving as delegates, but it allows the individual states to determine how the delegates are divided up.
Interesting how the Democrat hierarchy wants to control everything. To have the superdelegates casting their votes because they can use their brains, tells me that John thinks the common Democrat doesn’t have any. That is the typical mentality of an elitist. Why even have an election where us stupid people can vote? Just let the leadership pick ‘em, save the cost of elections.
H-S’s experience is only 4 years in Congress. Some of us commoners have been watching voting records for literally decades. And suprising to some, we even know how to use the internet!
Rich, can’t help but notice that you did not exactly rush to defend the superdelegate scheme. Likewise, you didn’t touch on my point about the stupid analogy comparing superdelegates to expert witnesses.
Shall I take it that we are in agreement as to these points?
I’ve often wondered why this Superdelegate was created. MADsen 4:02 FINALLY answered my question. The Demo elite knows that their party is the workingman’s party, the poor, dissheveled and “unique”. I have no doubt now that the demos put this Superdelegate tactic in to somehow overruled the IQ challenged ones who what the government to do everything for them. I.e. “Dudes: a lot of morons are voting for Demos and we need to make sure that they vote for the “right” one.” Unbelievable. A light has been cast onto my face and I see the truth. The truth as set me free…..
Engels 5:58 The GOP has it right, if a candidate wins a state, they eat the cake. Demos on the otherhand say: “These morons voted for the wrong moron and I’m the moron to set things right…” i.e. GOP follows the winner, Demos vote for whoever throws the best party. Anon 11:00 give yourself a raise.
Wiken 10:27 “You’re” a dolt. The demo system is not “proportional”, that’s the argument against the Superdelegates, i.e. “the voters are nuts, I’m voting for _______” Everyone with the IQ of eggplants is quick to jump on Bush. Name a recent President who’s gone through more than he (we) has: First time US has EVER been attacked on US Soil, an enemy who is unidentified and is willing, no, wants to die to shack up with 99 virgins (or whatever the count is now), economies going to hell because of the middle east pressures, gas prices which would make a billygoat puke, China finally getting off their asses and industrializing (to the demise of us all) i.e. 8 out of 10 of the most poluted cities in the world are in that shithole, environmental concerns that haven’t impacted human civilization for centuries, overpopulation, diseases never heard of before….. I could go on. I challenge anyone to come up with a legitimate person who could have handled these messes without getting numerous black eyes.
Every generation says this, but I sincerely feel sorry for the young kids of this nation, they, if some miracle doesn’t come through to change a lot of this, are screwed !!!
The whole issue of super delegates was exactly what was said above. The voters aren’t exactly bright and can’t be trusted to make the right decision; therefore we will have the super delegates to correct what needs to be corrected. So much for the Dems caring what the “little guys,” i.e. ordinary voters, choose. Ain’t politics wonderful?!
And now Stephanie falls right in line with this thinking – those poor, ignorant, unlearned people in South Dakota really can’t know what is good for them, so I will just override their decision and all will be right with the world again.
And Chris, you didn’t touch on my point about the Republican Party entirely disenfranchising large percentages of voters in a lot of large states, or the GOP system that forces candidates out of the race early giving later primary states like SD no meaningful choice.
So I presume we are in agreement on those matters?
I move to table (-;
“Proportional representation balanced a bit with some “Super Delegates” is a compromise system much like the federal system. No matter what the Republican system looks like, it is a top-down manipulated system. How else could they end up with a dolt like Bush?”
Actually, the GOP system, where each state gets to decide how to allocate the delegates, is almost identical to the federal electoral college. I’m not sure how the Democratic system is at all like the federal system – using proportional division and unelected delegates.
Debate over the role and effect of superdelegates notwithstanding, this says a lot about our Congresswoman.
She caught a lot of criticism for endorsing a raging liberal and then sticking by it, so now she thinks the system needs changing, according to the RCJ. Wow.
And she must be living in a dream world, considering this statement in the RCJ: that Obama’s “appeals for changing how Washington operates and the partisan nature and condition that has stalled important legislation.”
Puh-leez. As a Senator with a nearly 100 percent liberal voting record, Obama has shown little interest in reaching across the aisle or in bipartisanship, which is something that Herseth likes to tout. Worse yet, she calls herself a Blue Dog Democrat (fiscal conservatism is one of their mantras), but she endorses Edwards and Obama, who are about as liberal as you can get with other people’s money.
Your excuses ring hollow, Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin. And Republicans who have voted for you (like me) will remember come November.
1:11 pm, well put.
Evidently Rich Engels doesn’t agree with our US Constitution. In the Electoral Collage, as established by that document, the presidential candidate who wins a state gets all the electoral votes.
But then, the liberals who don’t agree with our constitution, have been trying through the US Supreme Court to change it, and sometimes succeeding.
Duh! says: “I challenge anyone to come up with a legitimate person who could have handled these messes without getting numerous black eyes.”
Al Gore.
Doh.
Anon 1:11
There are three different types of super delegates.
1. Democratic members of Congress, which means that they have been elected.
2. State party leaders who have been elected by the democrats in their respective states, so they too have been elected.
3. Past leaders of congress and other bodies. They are not currently elected to anything except early retirement in most cases.
I understand why they did this way back when but think that it needs to be changed a bit.
Start with dropping all the super delegates except the state party leaders. Now make it so that no super delegate can pledge their vote until their own state has completed either their caucus or primary election. If a super delegate declares before this has happened, they loose their vote.
Fo3, you can drop all the super delegates this year if you want, AND include Michigan and Florida delegates at full value and Obama still got the most pledged delegates.
In other words, the “superdelegate” debate is a Republican strawman diversion.
Those with rational intelligence will see through this ruse immediately.
Only folks like Guy Smiley who want to manipulate people by tweaking their emotions will make a big deal of this.
F of 3; Of the 842 superdelegates that the Dems have about 275 are members of Congress. Approximately 150 would be party officials from the states. That leaves over 400 that are not elected by the people.
Almost half of the 842 superdelegates are NOT elected by the registered Democrat voters.
Bill – Al Gore????!!!! The father of the internet and now global warming?? The hypocrite was preaches global warming warnings while polluting more than I will in my entire life all the while owning a carbon credit company and raking in the moola from this scheme? I just had my laugh for the day!!
Having Al Gore win the Nobel Peace Prize was a joke. What does global warming have to do with peace anyway?
Basically the earth has warmed and cooled many tiems over the span of earth’s life, as evidenced by geologists and historians. Seems more to do with the sun than anything else. I agree with taking care of our planet, but global warming is a hype that unfortunately is being accepted as true even though there is good evidence to doubt it.
But keep up the spin, BF. Whatever. G’night for now. Sweet dreams in your overly globally warmed bedroom!
anon 10:57
Go back and look at the remaining super delegates, the 400 or so you list. Those that hold offices within the structure of the DNC are elected by the democrats. It is the ones that are not that I think have to go. As for the 150 from the states, there are 50 states, 4 members per state, that is 200. Now add in the territories and that is another 12 to 20 members.
BF,
not saying that Obama would not have won in the end, but there would not be the appearance of others having appointed him vs his winning it on his own in the primaries. With the tallies as close as they are, would he have won it already or would we be looking at a brokered convention, where no one won on the first ballot and then the fun would have started?
Remember, we are all just dumb South Dakota people. Stephanie has been in DC for years – she knows much better than we do who should be president.