Dems: A pre-convention convention?
posted at 7:00 pm on March 31, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Have the remaining Democratic primary contests become irrelevant? The focus on superdelegates has made the next nine primaries look less and less important. Some Democrats have now proposed a convention of superdelegates in order to select a nominee immediately after the last primary in Puerto Rico. That would supposedly force a choice well before the rest of the delegates meet in August at the main convention:
Hoping to avoid a summer-long bloodbath for the Democratic presidential nomination, some party leaders such as Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen have urged a convention of superdelegates in June, after the caucuses and primaries are over.
The idea sounds exotic, but recent public declarations and Politico interviews with top Democratic officials have made clear that something like what Bredesen proposed is already underway — not with a big meeting but with an intensifying series of exchanges among party elites. …
It is taking place also in private entreaties by e-mail or phone — the modern equivalent of smoke-filed rooms — as advocates for Obama urge an early end to the race and Clinton backers plead for time and warn about his general election vulnerabilities.
What a great idea! Let’s have a smoke-filled back room in June to replace the smoke-filled back room in August! There is only one thing wrong with this scenario — the rules of the party allow superdelegates to change their minds all the way to the first ballot at the real convention. They can make their call at the preconvention, but the rules for the party can’t be changed until the actual convention, which makes the entire effort pointless.
Not only that, but Florida and Michigan still have a right to be heard by the credentials committee. They want to have their delegates seated, especially if the DNC plans any major rule changes in Denver. What do the Democrats plan to tell them — they’re irrelevant, too?
Jazz Shaw at Middle Earth Journal doesn’t sound enthused by this idea, and blames it on one person:
I still have a problem with this, however, and it’s not with the supers. It’s with the Clinton campaign, including Bill and all of her handlers. The media is far too aware of every nook and cranny of the inner workings of the Democratic party. If Hillary is dragged out kicking and screaming, even as a unified act of the supers, a significant portion of her supporters may still sit out in November. The only real solution which avoids having the Democrats once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is for one of the candidates (most likely Hillary) to do it on their own.
The only problem with blaming it on Hillary is that she’s following the rules set by the Democrats — and she is still winning primaries. Why should she quit under those circumstances? People still want to vote for her, and given the month Obama has had, one can hardly blame them for looking at the alternatives.
The blame lies with the Democrats and their decidedly undemocratic nomination process. If they want to have a nominee hand-picked by party establishment, then they should stop wasting the time of the voters in primaries. If they want the superdelegates to subjugate their own judgment for that of their constituents, then the Democrats shouldn’t have 20% of their delegates as superdelegates. If the party can’t make up its mind between those two positions, then it’s hardly a surprise that they can’t make a clean choice between two candidates, either.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’m really enjoying watching this. As much as it sucks that we have McCain, at least we have something to enjoy during this election cycle.
doubleplusundead on March 31, 2008 at 7:06 PM
Nothing says “democracy” like a bunch of party big wigs getting together at a previously unsanctioned meeting to discuss our potential next president.
amerpundit on March 31, 2008 at 7:06 PM
discuss=decide
amerpundit on March 31, 2008 at 7:07 PM
Count every vote, when it’s convenient.
tarpon on March 31, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Um, I thought that Conventions were there to choose Nominees???
Talk about messing with the systema and changing the rules in mid contest.
Romeo13 on March 31, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Out with the electoral college, in with the super whammy Democratic, round-robin, sudden-death, super delegate college.
Money talks, the Constitution walks.
Hening on March 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM
So, for the remainder of the primary states including Florida and Michigan they just tell them . . . “never mind we don’t need you anymore”. This maneuver will reveal the biggest political farce since Dewey was announced the winner of his 1948 presidential bid against Truman. If the Democratic voters are not thoroughly disgusted and disillusioned by their national party, its leaders and its candidates, then they are beyond insult.
rplat on March 31, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Silly Democrats.
Vizzini on March 31, 2008 at 7:22 PM
That is what they’re there for - it’s just that with the Republicans having already clinched and the 24-hour news cycle constantly pumping out information about McCain, who’s starting to look more and more appealing to the American public, they want to start the general campaign early.
apollyonbob on March 31, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Local (Chicago) politics going national.
Best thing about it this time is the Clitons get whacked.
GoBama… pour water on it.
dhunter on March 31, 2008 at 7:25 PM
It’s more of the same from the Dims. Count every vote, unless they are military ballots cast for a Presidential election, and the Dims might lose the recount.
What this sounds like is the Dim nominee will be “selected, not elected.” a-hahahahahaha.
Mallard T. Drake on March 31, 2008 at 7:30 PM
Money talks, the Constitution walks.
Hening on March 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM
Exactly Hening…The Dem mantra revealed…
Keemo on March 31, 2008 at 7:40 PM
As hilarious as this Dhimmocrap election debacle has been, we still have to face the grim reality that one of these three open-borders, close-Guantanamo liberals will be the next president. We got our work cut out for us no matter who steals this election.
Fishoutofwater on March 31, 2008 at 7:44 PM
I have watched a lot of presidential elections. My first vote at 21 was for Nixon. This has got to be the wierdest I’ve personally seen. It’s been wierd on both sides. I dub this one, “The Season of the Witch”.
You could kinda see it shaping up with the shrieking left moving into the forefront and staying there for 6 yrs. They really did sieze mo in the dem party. The conservatives laid down for Bush because the supported the war and let him off the hook on the domestic side resulting in a lose of conservative power within the party. By the time the primaries showed up, Conservatives were in such disaray they were claiming anyone who wasn’t McCain a conservative. Some went for the moderate to lefty Romney, some went with the should have been kicked in the butt, Huckabee. Anyway, no leadership.
thatcher on March 31, 2008 at 7:51 PM
Contrary to Susan Estrich’s, and other liberal luminaries’ assertions, the left doesn’t have two strong and simpatico candidates, it has one vacuously transparent and inexperienced one, and one who’s a known misanthropic lying witch.
Makes it hard to decide. Self-made fork. Which road to take? Psychologists/psychiatrists, prepare yer couches.
Entelechy on March 31, 2008 at 7:53 PM
This tells me a couple of things.
1. They know that Hillary will not sit down and shut up like a good little girl.
2. They know if she pushes a credential fight it will make last weekends Texas caucuses look like a tea party.
3. The “owners” of the Democratic party (moveon.org, George Soros and the rest of the “usual suspects”) along with the Democratic party leadership want Obama to be the nominee. Obama matches their political mindset-an anti American Marxist who loves the Islamofascists (he gets extra points for being black and a racist). They want the convention to be more like a Nuremberg party rally then a true exercise in Democracy. In simpler terms they want a coronation and propaganda event. Most importantly as it stands now they could lose a sizable chunk of voters no matter who is the nominee-they are hoping a placid and “unified” convention will stop the bleeding. It won’t.
4. They know that by the time the convention rolls around a good portion of Obama’s dirty laundry will be out of his baggage for all to see. Most of the super delegates are no fools and they will know by that time that Obama is a disaster in the making and will drag the rest of the Dem ticket down to defeat. The likelihood of them giving Hillary the nomination is high.
5. The convention stands a very good chance to be a true riot-both inside and outside the convention hall. There is no way the MSM can cover that up. They know they managed to squeak in a Dem majority in the congress and senate in 2006 by trying to look moderate and reasonable. A full blown 1968 freak show would blow that one out of the water.
I have taken the week of the convention off to enjoy the show.
Nahanni on March 31, 2008 at 9:07 PM
It A super delegate ‘primary’ would be to protect the supers from individual retribution; and would given the Clintons the advantage in the superdelegate buying spree.
Exit question: what is the average cash value of the political bribery/extortion/blackmail that will be thrown at the supers to get their vote? My guess would be in the 200K range.
michaelo on March 31, 2008 at 9:09 PM
This is fun. The count every vote and make sure every vote counts people have decided that the rules are inconvenient. So they have decided to play Calvin Ball. AKA “Rules?!? We doan’ need no steenkin’ rules!!!” John Leo thought up a great name for this years ago - the victimhood sweepstakes.
This really was predictable. The logical outcome of identity politics was a contested election between groups who have been favored by the Democratic Party as groups with grievances. So who claims to be the most victimized? It should surprise no one that a group which has claimed to be entitled to special treatment due to its certified victim (TM) status would simply argue that the group was owed the presidency. That seems to be what is driving much of the most vocal Clinton supporters. And, to some extent, some of the most militant people Obama is trying to appeal to are equally devoted to the concept that they are ‘owed’ by society. Ed Kaitz has written a nice piece on this on the American Thinker - look for “Obama’s Anger.”
The Democratic Party seems to be returning to the days of smoke filled rooms,and party bosses selecting the candidates. The votes are not being counted. Let’s be honest,and admit it.
Orson Buggeigh on March 31, 2008 at 9:26 PM
For awhile this thing was entertaining …. now it is just pathetic.
But not to worry, the Dems have their Super Delegates standing by to correct the mistakes made by the voting public.
Chimp 6 on March 31, 2008 at 9:39 PM
And this is the crowd that wants to get rid of the electoral college so everyone’s voice counts. What a bucket of ….
deepdiver on March 31, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Rules Rules Rules,who needs stinkin rules,
the Democratic Liberal Party sure has a
strange definition of their democracy in
action!
From a Party who whines and accuses the other
side of voting discrepancys,hanging chads,accusations
of voter intimidations,voter harassment at the polls
and a whole laundry list of voter fraud!
They sure have some nerve,no sheer guts as to how
how democracy works in thier political party,good
grief!
canopfor on March 31, 2008 at 9:42 PM
I’ve gotta think that herding superdelegates into a premature decision is a lot like herding cats. Possible in principle but impossible in practice.
Let’s keep in mind that the “superdelegates” are the party faithful of a party in complete disarray because the special interests are colliding with the impact of tectonic plates rearranging themselves. The only outcome of this “special” convention would be a brokered shotgun wedding with Obama and Clinton on the same ticket in an order to be hashed out by the Superdelegates. This would be a tacit admission that the whole primary system was flawed and wouldn’t actually resolve anything. Whichever wannabe would be placed at the bottom of the ticket still has supporters who would resent the deal brokered by “super” few.
The GOP was far more efficient when it told a huge portion of its’ base to “f**k off” and get lost. The downside for the GOP, of course, is that their strategy is based on appealing to the ideologic enemy rather than looking for grass roots support. If Triceratops wins, he will have very little support among his base. The more he panders to the left, the more the fact that he is a political traitor will be exposed. My prediction for McCain (at best) one term wonder compared to Jimmy Carter and GHW Bush in terms of leadership.
highhopes on March 31, 2008 at 10:15 PM
This is good comedy!!!
oncore oncore oncore!
allrsn on March 31, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Foisted on their own petard. Bummer.
katieanne on March 31, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Who would have thought that the Democrats would be the ones with the circular firing squad?
The all wanted their primaries early and this is what happens. It is fun to watch.
dentalque on March 31, 2008 at 10:54 PM
Given how the Dimocrats have structured their nomination process, is there any wonder they lost in 2000 and 2004?
Is there any wonder that their people can’t follow a ballot that they themselves designed?
“We are the Democratic Party, come join us in irrelevance.”
GarandFan on March 31, 2008 at 11:08 PM
For the last [how many] years it was obvious that the leadership of the democrat party was putting party interests ahead of the national interest.
Now we see that those same party leaders are putting personal interest ahead of party interest.
“Never saw that coming.”
rockhauler on March 31, 2008 at 11:20 PM
until the actual convention, which makes the entire effort pointless.
Who says? Since when did the democrats follow rules?
boomer on March 31, 2008 at 11:26 PM
That didn’t work right.
boomer on March 31, 2008 at 11:27 PM
Who says? Since when did the democrats follow rules?
That’s better.
boomer on March 31, 2008 at 11:28 PM
Let the recriminations begin, I say.
km on April 1, 2008 at 12:43 AM
The Clinton campaign is too obvious in its attacks and strategy. When this is all over you will find that by far the dirtiest fighter is Obama and his Obamites. He has a history (not that anyone would know).
davod on April 1, 2008 at 8:08 AM
If they run the superdelegate anything like they ran the district caucuses in Texas, the GOP will have November locked up.
michaelo on April 1, 2008 at 8:25 AM
superdelegate *convention*
michaelo on April 1, 2008 at 8:25 AM
I’m not by any means going to predict a certain GOP victory in November, but the Dems are screwed either way. Hillary stays in, Obama loses the general - they blame her for making the process more fractious and giving them less time to “unite” for the general. Hillary drops out and Obama loses the general - she blames him saying he had too many “vulnerabilities” in the general. This is fun.
Captain Scarlet on April 1, 2008 at 8:37 AM
Upon what cesspool or sewer pit will these complete jackasses converge?
This will be the most complete collection of stupid, vain, criminal, corrupt and incompetent idiots in all of history.
This must be recorded.
NoDonkey on April 1, 2008 at 8:54 AM
It is apparent to me that the Demoncrate Convention in June featuring “Bitter” (Hitlery) v. “Sweet” (Obama) is going to be as famous as A Wrestlemania Cage Match.
MSGTAS on April 1, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Seems like a lot of Democrat voters wanted to avoid the Misadventures of BJ Clinton and Wife in the White House, Part III, so they latched onto the Great Black Hope who talked a slicker game than Slick Willie himself, dominating caucuses and racking up delegates in such liberal bastions(?) as Kansas and North Dakota, until he turned out to be a socialist hatemonger from the Daley machine. Wasn’t this what the superdelegates were designed to avoid?
If they were smart, they could avoid disaster by throwing the nomination to Hillary, but since Obama won more pledged delegates, that makes the Democratic party look un-democratic. Besides, are Democrats smart?
Steve Z on April 1, 2008 at 5:33 PM