Hollywood bigwig Ari Emanuel knows a thing or two about superdelegates. His brother, Congressman Rahm Emanuel, is one. But, as Ari writes on the Huffington Post, “as much as I love and respect him, I don’t trust him and his fellow superdelegates to decide for me and the American people who should be the Democratic nominee—and, therefore, most likely the next president of the United States.”
Huffington Post:
I want voters to make that decision. The superdelegates, my brother included, have not been elected by anybody to name the nominee. They’ve either been appointed by the Party or, as in my brother’s case, have automatically inherited the role simply because they are elected officials. This isn’t the place to debate the entire history of superdelegates. Suffice it to say, however, they were created by the Party machine decades ago for the express purpose of giving Party insiders the ability to thwart the popular will.
After what Democrats went through in Florida in 2000, we should be the first to reject any such funny business. We should be as opposed to superdelegates changing the course of an election as we were to the Supreme Court appointing George W. Bush president.
The right thing for my brother, and all the other superdelegates to do, is to support the decision of the voters. Whichever candidate has won the most delegates going into the national convention should be granted the endorsement of the superdelegates. Period. And we should put pressure on them to agree to do so now—before the jockeying, lobbying, and infighting get really ugly, as they inevitably will.
Likewise, Democrats must firmly oppose any shenanigans regarding delegates from Michigan and Florida. The party and the candidates all agreed that the delegates coming out of those states would not be seated. Unringing that bell after the fact and by fiat would be an outrage. We have only two legitimate options when it comes to Florida and Michigan: either we stick by the original agreement. Or we organize new elections in those states this summer in which both the Obama and Clinton campaigns can evenly compete.
Read more
Email Newsletter
Get truth delivered to your inbox every week.
Previous item: Inside the Mind of Pol Pot's Henchman
Next item: Whispering in the Ear of the President
Palin vs. Palin
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
By farmertx, February 12 at 4:01 pm #
CY--
Report thisOne of the best, not The Best.
I have long wanted to be done with the Electoral College. Back in the 1800’s, I guess it made sense. Today it doesn’t.
I don’t understand the British system (and I know Canada isn’t British, per se) but I like the part of calling elections when confidence is lost in the current P.M. Plus, there are no 6 month or longer run up to the election.
But this Superdelegate deal is just one more way for the Party Hierarchy to limit the influence of the voter’s, and that just ain’t right.
Kinda like the Republican’s wanting to expand the Electoral system to Statewide elections as they are attempting to do in CA.
By Conservative Yankee, February 12 at 7:26 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I live to close to Canada to accept this notion.
Although the parliamentary system has its flaws also, they are not as glaring. One of the reasons for this is there is no “National” election per se. There are many small elections where it is more difficult to cheat. Just the enormity of 150 million voters, and an electoral college parsed, not by population, but by land-mass seems to negate fairness.
Maine has more than twice the number of people Wyoming has, BUT they get only 1 more elector. That isn’t any where near “representative”
someone care to disagree?
Report thisBy Leefeller, February 12 at 6:32 am #
Since I was rooting for Kucinich, Iowa has already super-delegated my choice.
Report thisBy Aegrus, February 12 at 5:30 am #
These Super duper delegate cronies had better be left out of the equation. Howard Dean now has the opportunity to show what he’s really made of.
Report thisBy Trigger finger, February 12 at 4:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Seems to me the Democrats now have a sure fire way to fix this election. There will be no changes in Washington, just the same old political B__l S__t. There is no way for the voters to win in these fixed elections. Why even have them, just let congress or the courts name a new president or even better just let the president name a successor. Think of the money we could save. What a farce.
Report thisBy i,Q, February 12 at 3:56 am #
Prove it. If by better than in say Myanmar, sure, but i hear unfounded statements of how great America is all the time. It is probably true that we have the biggest mouths and largest bodies in the world. If we’re going to slap ourselves on the back for being great, then i for one think it better damn well be true.
Report thisBy GW=MCHammered, February 11 at 9:57 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
We The People must expatriate, even if we do not leave, so that this papier-mâché neo-con-stitution crumbles.
Report thisBy farmertx, February 11 at 7:57 pm #
I could almost see an elected official being a Superdelegate. But many I have see listed are just people, not representing anybody officially.
Report thisGranted that the US has one of the best systems in the World for the political process, it is being diluted by such things as Magic Voting Machines and this Superdelegate nonsense.
If the voter’s have no say in who is a Superdelegate, there should be no Superdelelegate.