Comments on: Kingmakers: Super delegates and the Democratic Party http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/ A forum for discussion of news that arises at the intersection of Christianity and culture. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:06:54 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: SteveG http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269743 SteveG Mon, 04 Feb 2008 05:02:15 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269743 can you point me to further information on that? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not aware of this and would like to know more about how it works. can you point me to further information on that? I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I’m not aware of this and would like to know more about how it works.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: krm http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269734 krm Mon, 04 Feb 2008 04:01:00 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269734 SteveG - The portion of the delegates classed as "super delegates" in the article may approach the portion of appointed GOP delegates, but the Democrats have a lot more unbound delegates than those classed as "super delegates" in the article. SteveG – The portion of the delegates classed as “super delegates” in the article may approach the portion of appointed GOP delegates, but the Democrats have a lot more unbound delegates than those classed as “super delegates” in the article.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: SteveG http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269669 SteveG Sun, 03 Feb 2008 23:17:00 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269669 KRM: If Lynn's original post is correct, then the number of Democratic delegates nationally that are uncommitted as you describe is within two-tenths of a percentage point of the number of Republican delegates that are uncommitted. You may be correct about the higher percentage in Illinois, but on a national scale they're virtually the same. So what is the difference again? KRM: If Lynn’s original post is correct, then the number of Democratic delegates nationally that are uncommitted as you describe is within two-tenths of a percentage point of the number of Republican delegates that are uncommitted.

You may be correct about the higher percentage in Illinois, but on a national scale they’re virtually the same.

So what is the difference again?

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: krm http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269663 krm Sun, 03 Feb 2008 23:08:50 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269663 SteveG - The diference is in how the term committed is used. The elected ones are bound by party rules to vote (on the 1st ballot) for their pledged candidate. The appointed one may have 'committed' to a candidate, but they are not bound to honor that committement - they are permitted to change their minds at any time (so they aren't really "committed" are they?). SteveG – The diference is in how the term committed is used.

The elected ones are bound by party rules to vote (on the 1st ballot) for their pledged candidate. The appointed one may have ‘committed’ to a candidate, but they are not bound to honor that committement – they are permitted to change their minds at any time (so they aren’t really “committed” are they?).

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Bob Buckles http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269314 Bob Buckles Sat, 02 Feb 2008 15:22:15 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269314 #6 STEVEG The difference is that Democrats call Republicans elitists but deny their own elitism; Democrats always "Fight for the poor and working middle class!" Democrats have the "Vision of the Anointed." You can get the book by Thomas Sowell. He explains it so that even an elitist Republican like me can understand. Here is the short version of the vision of the anointed. If you give me enough time and enough money I will fix the problem. If I can't fix the problem it's because I need more time and money. (Think Great Society) #6 STEVEG

The difference is that Democrats call Republicans elitists but deny their own elitism; Democrats always “Fight for the poor and working middle class!”

Democrats have the “Vision of the Anointed.” You can get the book by Thomas Sowell. He explains it so that even an elitist Republican like me can understand. Here is the short version of the vision of the anointed.

If you give me enough time and enough money I will fix the problem. If I can’t fix the problem it’s because I need more time and money. (Think Great Society)

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Cheryl D. http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269255 Cheryl D. Sat, 02 Feb 2008 03:51:42 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269255 Steve G.: I'm rather hoping for that outcome, personally. The voters seem rather likely to choose McCain, but I can't imagine many truly knowledgeable Republicans (like the delegates) doing so. I'd love to see the delegates give us a different outcome. Of course, I suppose they might split their votes and still end up giving us McCain, but I'm really hoping for anybody but him at this point. Steve G.:

I’m rather hoping for that outcome, personally. The voters seem rather likely to choose McCain, but I can’t imagine many truly knowledgeable Republicans (like the delegates) doing so. I’d love to see the delegates give us a different outcome. Of course, I suppose they might split their votes and still end up giving us McCain, but I’m really hoping for anybody but him at this point.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: SteveG http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269191 SteveG Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:57:46 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269191 StuBob: You have a fair point there. My quibble is we don't know what's happening on the Republican side. (Or I don't anyway, maybe you do.) Republicans also have unpledged delegates, and the percentage of total delegates they make up is almost the same. Isn't it possible that Republicans could have the same "kingmaker" scenario, where the unpledged delegates line up behind the candidate that was only second place for the voters? StuBob: You have a fair point there.

My quibble is we don’t know what’s happening on the Republican side. (Or I don’t anyway, maybe you do.)

Republicans also have unpledged delegates, and the percentage of total delegates they make up is almost the same.

Isn’t it possible that Republicans could have the same “kingmaker” scenario, where the unpledged delegates line up behind the candidate that was only second place for the voters?

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: StuBob http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269164 StuBob Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:05:23 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269164 Here are the data leading to my conclusion: According to "2008 Democratic Convention Watch" (demconwatch dot com), HRC has 48 committed delegates to BHO's 63. That's BHO by 30%. However, HRC's 189 Superdelegates compared to BHO's 104 give her a total of 237 to his 167. That's HRC by 41%. CNN shows the Superdelegates as 184:97. That's 2:1 for Hillary. So, it's not hard to imagine a scenario where Party faithful install a nominee who isn't the members' choice. Add to this HRC's recent calls for the Michigan and Florida delegates to be counted, and it gets harder to imagine BHO being the nominee, regardless of the members' vote. Here are the data leading to my conclusion: According to “2008 Democratic Convention Watch” (demconwatch dot com), HRC has 48 committed delegates to BHO’s 63. That’s BHO by 30%.

However, HRC’s 189 Superdelegates compared to BHO’s 104 give her a total of 237 to his 167. That’s HRC by 41%.

CNN shows the Superdelegates as 184:97. That’s 2:1 for Hillary. So, it’s not hard to imagine a scenario where Party faithful install a nominee who isn’t the members’ choice.

Add to this HRC’s recent calls for the Michigan and Florida delegates to be counted, and it gets harder to imagine BHO being the nominee, regardless of the members’ vote.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: SteveG http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269125 SteveG Fri, 01 Feb 2008 21:36:54 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269125 KRM; Elected vs. appointed isn't the issue. The issue is pledged (to cast votes for the nominee that wins the state's primary) and unpledged (the ability to cast votes without regard to the state primary winner.) Go re-read Lynn's original post. 796 of the total 4,049 Democratic delegates are unpledged. That's 19.6 percent. 463 of the 2,380 Republican delegates are unpledged. That's 19.4 percent. It's an almost identical ratio. But somehow it's only bad when the Democrats do it? 'Splain that one. KRM; Elected vs. appointed isn’t the issue. The issue is pledged (to cast votes for the nominee that wins the state’s primary) and unpledged (the ability to cast votes without regard to the state primary winner.)

Go re-read Lynn’s original post. 796 of the total 4,049 Democratic delegates are unpledged. That’s 19.6 percent.

463 of the 2,380 Republican delegates are unpledged. That’s 19.4 percent.

It’s an almost identical ratio. But somehow it’s only bad when the Democrats do it? ‘Splain that one.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: krm http://online.worldmag.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/comment-page-1/#comment-269114 krm Fri, 01 Feb 2008 21:17:59 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2008/02/01/kingmakers-super-delegates-and-the-democratic-party/#comment-269114 SteveG - the GOP does NOT have exactly the same thing. In Illinois, for example, the D delegates consist of 185 people, 85 party party appointed and 100 elected (46% non-elected). The GOP has 70 delegates, of whom 13 are appointed (18.5% non-elected). There is a very strong chance, a near certainty in fact, that the non-elected nearly half of the D delegates will be the deciding factor. There is a much lesser chance of that on the GOP side (with fewer than one in five non-elected delegates). SteveG – the GOP does NOT have exactly the same thing.

In Illinois, for example, the D delegates consist of 185 people, 85 party party appointed and 100 elected (46% non-elected). The GOP has 70 delegates, of whom 13 are appointed (18.5% non-elected).

There is a very strong chance, a near certainty in fact, that the non-elected nearly half of the D delegates will be the deciding factor. There is a much lesser chance of that on the GOP side (with fewer than one in five non-elected delegates).

Report comment to moderator

]]>