Dedicated RSS Feed Search Engine
Search for News, Blogs, and RSS Feeds
| What is RSS feed? | About Us |
Dedicated RSS Feed Search Engine Search for News, Blogs, and RSS Feeds |
Sort by: Date |  |
 Score: 4/10
Source: politicalwire.com --- 5 days ago
"One year after the country got an in-depth lesson on 'Superdelegates,' the Democratic Party may consider doing away with them in the future," ABC News reports. "The lengthy, expensive, and often divisive 2008 Democratic nominating process caused the launch of a Democratic National Committee review of how to tweak the primary and caucus process to avoid some of the pitfalls exposed in the Obama vs. Clinton battle royale last year." ... Source: www.baystatebanner.com --- 154 days ago
... Source: www.observer.com --- 100 days ago
... ... Source: twitter.com --- 180 days ago
SalonMedia: Sex and the Superdelegates : It was a flaccid, unhot year in sex, but how about that election! Spitzer and Edwar.. http://tinyurl.com/99jggb ... Source: www.salon.com --- 180 days ago
It was a flaccid, unhot year in sex, but how about that election! Spitzer and Edwards may have gotten laid, but Barack and Hillary scored. ... Source: frontloading.blogspot.com --- 3 days ago
That's a question I tweeted over the weekend, but would like to explore a bit more. The question finds its root in some of the comments Elaine Kamarck made at this weekend's Democratic Change Commission meeting (from ABCNews ): Touching on what may prove to be one of the more contentious issues considered by the DNC, one presenter, Democratic Party activist and Harvard University lecturer and former superdelegate Elaine Kamarck, suggested that it may be time to completely eliminate Superdelegates since most of those party leaders clearly determined their role in 2008 to be one of ratifying the decision made by voters in primaries and caucuses. "We can probably let go of the Superdelegates," said Kamarck. "Their deliberative role," she added, "has in fact been supplanted by a very very public process." I hadn't really given this much thought before, but by following the will of the people (voting the way their constituents did), most Superdelegates actually undermined their original purpose. The reason Superdelegates came into being in the interim period between the 1980 and 1984 elections was to allow the party establishment an increased voice in the nomination process (something they saw as having diminished in the post-McGovern-Fraser reform era). Make no mistake, that is code for giving the party the opportunity to put a check on the decision of the people's choice. And no, that's not necessarily a bad thing. For the Democratic Par ... Source: twitter.com --- 4 days ago
dbernstein: Harvard's Elaine Kamarck suggests Dems ditch Superdelegates in future Pres. process: http://tinyurl.com/mwcw5f ...
Source: twitter.com --- 6 days ago
pwire: DNC may consider doing away with Superdelegates. http://tr.im/pZDF (via @DavidChalianABC) ... Source: www.fwicki.com --- 4 days ago
Seems like only yesterday that the entire nation was thrilling to the sturm und drang of the Democratic Party presidential primary process. Remember that nonsense? Michigan and Florida had their delegates denied! Texas had some three-headed demon-cow ... ... Source: www.sexualforums.com --- 180 days ago
*This is an automatic sex news posting for the following:* You want to know how sexy this year was? So sexy that it might as well have been subtitled, "Not tonight, honey, I've got an election to obsess over." So sexy that if you did manage to get it on, I'm going to ... Click here to... ... Source: markschmitt.typepad.com --- 110 days ago
Who would imagine that there was more to say on the subject of the Democratic Party's Superdelegates? Yet two posts this week on The Democratic Strategist and on PolitickerNJ add some important context to the historical role of Superdelegates, and make clear that their role amounts to a lot more than avoiding an unelectable candidate. On the New Jersey site, former Senator Robert Toricelli recalled the Hunt Commission, which devised the Superdelegates, drawing on his role in his youth as Walter Mondale's representative to the commission: The most important [goal] was to get Members of Congress back in the process. First, unless Congressional leaders participated in the process, they would feel no accountability to the platform and no responsibility for the nominee. To choose a candidate without Members of Congress and Governors participating was bad politics and bad government. Ed Kilgore puts it similarly: As I recall from the original discussions surrounding Superdelegates, there was another, much simpler rationale: ensuring that major Democratic elected officials would get to attend the convention as delegates. One of the byproducts of the earlier reforms in the nominating process had been to significantly limit elected official participation, except for those who happened to run for delegate positions on successful candidate tickets. And this in turn reinforced a fear that the Democratic Party was increasingly becoming bifurcated i ... See also: Superdelegates |
Follow RSSMicro on |
Copyright © 2009 RSSMicro.com
Democratic leaders and "grassroots activists" (shout out to Roseanne from MN) have begun a series of meetings to determine whether, and if so how, to reform the delegate selection process for nominating a presidential candidate. A prime reason for these meetings is to re-examine the role of so-called "Superdelegates" in the nominating process. Team Obama, of course, was worried throughout much of 2008 that Superdelegates--Democratic party insiders who are uncommitted and free to vote for whomever they choose, regardless of how their state's voters came out--would tilt the field in favor of Hillary, "stealing" the election despite Obama's wins. Obama has little to worry about now since he IS the quintessential Democratic insider and party officials presumably will support him in 2012 absent some horrendous misstep. Nonetheless, many Obamites are uncomfortable with the current structure and want it changed. So, should the Dems eliminate Superdelegates, or at least modify the structure? To begin with, party officials will always be able to attend the convention and vote. Before the superdelegate structure was put in place, many of the regular delegates were party officials, who are good at getting themselves nominated as delegates. So don't worry that they somehow will miss the party. Instead, the question is whether they should be allowed to uncommitted, or should instead be allocated to candidates like other delegates. The theory behin ...
