Super Delegates And Why The Need To Go

Secret History of Super Delegates

Depending on what plays out at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, June 7, 2016 will go down in history as the day Democracy was dealt a fatal blow because the presidential nomination was stolen using a multitude of voter suppression and election fraud techniques or as the day Democracy was revitalized because we beat back the attempts at voter suppression and election fraud by the establishment and made our voices heard. One of the biggest tools used to suppress voter turnout in this presidential election cycle was the way Super Delegates were used to pad Hillary Clinton’s delegate count even before the campaign started.

The super delegate system was created by something called the Hunt Commission, and chaired by North Carolina Gov. Jim Hunt, during 1981 to 1982. There was a belief held by the Democratic establishment of the time that grassroots organizations had too much control over the nominating process. They didn’t want uncontrollable upstarts to take control of the government, and the Democratic party. The goal of the Hunt Commission was to create a nominating process that would help more conservative Democrats to win, and super delegates became the way to give the party apparatus more sway.

June 6, 2016, the day before the final Super-Tuesday, the Associated Press (AP) preemptively named Hillary Clinton the official Democratic Presidential Nominee.  Journalists allegedly discovered that Secretary Clinton had claimed a few more unpledged super delegates that put her at the magic 2,383 delegate mark.  The problem with this is, super delegates do not vote until the Democratic National Convention in late July.  Super delegate can change their mind at any point up to the actual vote at the national convention, but the mainstream media (MSM) eagerly ran the misleading story anyway.

Hillary Clinton won California, Bernie Sanders’ make it or break it state, by a suspiciously large margin.  It has been revealed that over two million ballots had not been counted, with over 1.3 million still uncounted as of June 16. California has received, and is still receiving, allegations of voter suppression and election fraud.  These allegations are largely fueled by the above mentioned MSM stories with headlines like “Hillary Clinton Clinches Democratic Nomination” and journalists eagerly playing up identity politics by labeling the event a big win for women. Beginning with “The First In The Nation” state, Iowa, all the way through to the last primary in Washington D.C., it has been clear that Bernie Sanders’ supporters have been at far greater risk of being turned away at the polls or having their votes discounted for a controversial myriad of bureaucratic reasons.

Since June 7, additional counting has flipped three California counties from Clinton to Sanders. It was reported today that Los Angeles County and San Francisco have also flipped from Clinton to Sanders.

The MSM, DNC and Democratic Party establishment have worked overtime to artificially amplify Clinton’s popularity at the expense of Sanders’ support.  The Democratic Party, once touted as the political party of inclusiveness, has become a parody of itself as it aggressively barred Bernie Sanders’ supporters from closed primaries.

Millennials, independents, and even Republicans, all of whom overwhelmingly favor Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton, have faced obstacles trying to cast ballots in closed Democratic primaries.  Sometimes, they were required to be registered as Democrats months before voting day.  Other times, they discovered at the polls that their recent registrations as Democrats could not be found.  Who knows if there were instances where votes were intentionally miscounted?  Given that most state-level Democratic parties are heavily pro-Clinton, it is almost impossible to assure that primary election tallies have not been tampered with.

Democratic super delegates, who have overwhelmingly supported Hillary Clinton, most since before the Iowa caucus even commenced on February 1, are tasked with voting for the candidate they consider most likely to win the general election this fall.  All the polls reveal that Bernie Sanders, not Hillary Clinton, handily bests Donald Trump.  Throw in Clinton’s legal woes and scandals and one would think that the super delegates would see Hillary Clinton as precisely the candidate that they were always intended to prevent from garnering the nomination. A scandal-plagued candidate of questionable popularity, who faces serious long-term liabilities, is precisely the sort of politician who should be banned from becoming the Democratic nominee.  On paper, at least, super delegates were charged with ensuring that such a flawed politician could never claim the nomination and put the Democratic Party’s general election viability at risk.  Hillary Clinton epitomizes the sort of flawed politician who could spectacularly implode between August and November.  Who knows how much more Hillary Clinton dirt remains to be exposed?

Wikileaks, Anonymous, the FBI, or Donald Trump’s private investigators could swiftly sink Clinton’s campaign between now and election day by revealing damning new details of her lies and/or corruption.  This is bad enough on its own, but its danger is compounded by the fact that Hillary Clinton’s popularity is already relatively weak.  Only mainstream media bias and Democratic National Committee maneuverings have allowed her to win the majority of pledged delegates.  Frankly, Clinton need not fall far in the polls to guarantee a Donald Trump victory in any general election match-up between the two.

Most Democratic super delegates should realize that, on a level playing field, Bernie Sanders would be the presidential nominee.  He has decades of experience, is unrivaled at winning against the odds, has bold and popular policy proposals, and has an unrivaled reputation for integrity and consistency.  Nothing is going to trip up Bernie Sanders on his way to a general election victory over Donald Trump.

I know that a lot of Democrats have stated that super delegates need to be removed from the process.  Taking in consideration what has transpired this election cycle, I would have to agree. However, had the super delegates not been used as a way to suppress voters by making it seem like Hillary Clinton’s pledged delegate count was much higher than it really was, I am not against them fulfilling their purpose as proposed by the Hunt Commission.  The fault for the suppression is at least two-fold:

  • The DNC, while stating that super delegate shouldn’t be used in the count, never forced the issue to keep the MSM from using them in the way they did.
  • The super delegates themselves could have refrained from making their support public until the Democratic National Convention, therefore, not allowing the MSM to use them the way they did.

Seeing as neither of these things seem likely to change in the future, I hold to the statements of other that super delegates must go. Since this is not going to happen this election cycle, I hope that between now and July 25, the Democratic super delegates come to their senses and realize that Hillary Clinton is less popular than she appears and is at a dangerously high risk of imploding before election day.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s