superdelegates

[longknife]

Hillary won the popular vote in her party last go round but lost the election.

Yeah because Obama got most of the super delegates.
Now she is doing the same thing against Sanders.

about half the superdelegates have not committed to Hillary or anyone, so Bernie has a good chance to capture all of those super delegates...

plus, a couple of the super delegates that initially committed to Hillary were in the news saying they were going to or had already, changed their commitment to Bernie the past couple of days.

Do you see what is wrong with the way the super delegates have been done?
Those rules needs to change back to the way it was before both parties changed them in the 70's and 80's.
They changed them to favor the incumbents not for the ordinary citizen who wants to run.
It is the very reason why it is so hard for a 3rd party to run.

yes, I do....

Why are ''parties'' even running our election process? Was it always this way?

Yes, but the second place guy became the vice president. Made for interesting times.

And several VEEPS had different political affiliations than the Prez. For example, Adams and Jefferson

 

[Iceweasel]

Yeah because Obama got most of the super delegates.
Now she is doing the same thing against Sanders.

about half the superdelegates have not committed to Hillary or anyone, so Bernie has a good chance to capture all of those super delegates...

plus, a couple of the super delegates that initially committed to Hillary were in the news saying they were going to or had already, changed their commitment to Bernie the past couple of days.

Do you see what is wrong with the way the super delegates have been done?
Those rules needs to change back to the way it was before both parties changed them in the 70's and 80's.
They changed them to favor the incumbents not for the ordinary citizen who wants to run.
It is the very reason why it is so hard for a 3rd party to run.

yes, I do....

Why are ''parties'' even running our election process? Was it always this way?

Yes, but the second place guy became the vice president. Made for interesting times.

And several VEEPS had different political affiliations than the Prez. For example, Adams and Jefferson

Yes, it's what I meant. The top two in opposing parties. Like we could get Trump as POTUS and Hillary as VP. That would be worth doing in my book.

 

[washamericom]

about half the superdelegates have not committed to Hillary or anyone, so Bernie has a good chance to capture all of those super delegates...

plus, a couple of the super delegates that initially committed to Hillary were in the news saying they were going to or had already, changed their commitment to Bernie the past couple of days.

Do you see what is wrong with the way the super delegates have been done?
Those rules needs to change back to the way it was before both parties changed them in the 70's and 80's.
They changed them to favor the incumbents not for the ordinary citizen who wants to run.
It is the very reason why it is so hard for a 3rd party to run.

yes, I do....

Why are ''parties'' even running our election process? Was it always this way?

Yes, but the second place guy became the vice president. Made for interesting times.

And several VEEPS had different political affiliations than the Prez. For example, Adams and Jefferson

Yes, it's what I meant. The top two in opposing parties. Like we could get Trump as POTUS and Hillary as VP. That would be worth doing in my book.

it would depend on who controls the secret service.

 

[longknife]

Something to think about. The results of the November general election ARE NOT completely binding to the members of the Electoral College.

Are there restrictions on who the Electors can vote for?

There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

Go to NARA | Federal Register | U.S. Electoral College to find out what this is all about.

 

[washamericom]

IOW, it's a way to rig the system.


It's like I have been telling all you noobs here at USMB.

Democracy is an illusion. You have no control.

Yes
When we were a Republic the Constitution works, we the people were in control.
It has been changed to a Democracy and now it is not working and the elites in both parties are now in control.

Here's the kicker Peach, both parties are controlled by the same folks.


Then they get the people in both parties divided over stupid tertiary issues so they don't notice this fact. It keeps them distracted from the fact that both parties generally agree on the important issues. The issues that are screwing over the little folks in the nation.

The wars in the middle east for control and power continue, no matter who is in charge. The debasement of the economy for the Wall Street tycoons is always the same. The Clinton and the Bush family have always had the same backers.


It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight, black or white, like religious freedom or not, in the end, we're all fucked.

The super state is coming. The internationalists will have their way.



. . . . unless someone makes America great again?

Did you know Trump stole that from Regan?

Did you know that both Reagan and Hitler were set up to do the bidding of the internationalists?

It's not over till Trump is.

Even if he gets elected, there are no guarantees that he won't be the exact catalyst for what the internationalists desire. A war on the US. If they can't get brainwashed and manipulated the US citizens to give up their arms peacefully, they just might come in a do it by force when they crash the dollar. . .

What if the internationalists WANT a neo-isolationist as POTUS? What if the internationalists WANT an excuse to crash the dollar and wreck the US economy? If he isn't one of them yet, he might be by the time this is all over. Reagan had two choices, join them or die.

We know which one he chose in the end.

President Ronald Reagan is presented the Grand Cross of Merit Special Class during a special dinner sponsored by the Knight of Malta at the Waldorf.


The destruction of the US may be the only way a new international order might be born. . . .

How else are they going to replace the world's reserve currency and reset the world economy? All those toxic assets from the '08 crash are still festering in our basement you know. . . .

pretty big they.

 

[Steven_R]

superdelegates are like super hero action figures for the democrats:


A "superdelegate" or an "unpledged delegate" is a delegate to the Democratic National Convention or Republican National Convention that is seated automatically, based on their status as current (Republican and Democratic) or former (Democratic only) party leader or elected official. Other superdelegates are chosen during the primary season. Democratic superdelegates are free to support any candidate for the nomination. This contrasts with convention delegates that are selected based on the party primaries and caucuses in each U.S. state, in which voters choose among candidates for the party's presidential nomination.

Although "superdelegate" was originally coined and created to describe this type of Democratic delegate, the term has become widely used to describe these delegates in both parties,[1] even though it is not an official term used by either party.

For Democrats, superdelegates fall into two categories:

• delegates seated based on other positions they hold, who are formally described (in Rule 9.A) as "unpledged party leader and elected official delegates"[2](unpledged PLEO delegates); and
• additional unpledged delegates selected by each state party (in a fixed predetermined number), who are formally described (in Rule 9.B) as "unpledged add-on delegates" and who need not hold any party or elected position before their selection as delegates.[2]

For Republicans, there are generally 3 unpledged delegates in each state, consisting of the state chairman and two RNC committee members. However, according to the RNC communications director Sean Spicer, convention rules obligate those RNC members to vote according to the result of primary elections held in their states. [3]

A common criticism is that unpledged delegates could potentially swing the results to nominate a candidate that did not receive the majority of votes during the primaries.


watch for DWS to start changing things around. if i was in a union and conservative i'd be pissed, how they spend my dues.

btw, beyonce sucks. all that music is canned you know, it's the half value two for one millie vanilli halftime show.

tl;dr version: You didn't really think voting mattered, did you? The Party leadership decide for you who you get in November.

 

[washamericom]

sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[washamericom]

i thought i'd rekindle this thread because i think that bernie supporters are going to resent this part of the process. it's hillary's secret stash.

bernie's not a real democrat though. reince preibus said "i don't have a lot superdelegates in my back pocket like debbie wasserman shultz".

 

[longknife]

i thought i'd rekindle this thread because i think that bernie supporters are going to resent this part of the process. it's hillary's secret stash.

bernie's not a real democrat though. reince preibus said "i don't have a lot superdelegates in my back pocket like debbie wasserman shultz".

Sigh. Poor Bernie just got schlonged in two more states.