Current Issue
Back Issues
 Subscribe to BartBlog Feed
How to Read
Members ( need password)
Subscribe to BartCop!
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
Link to Us
Why Donate?
The Forum  -
The Reader
Poster Downloads
Shirts & Shots
BartCop Hotties
More Links
BFEE Scorecard
Perkel's Blog
Power of Nightmares
Clinton Fox Interview
Part 1, Part 2
Money Talks
Cost of Bush's greed
White Rose Society
Project 60
Chinaco Anejo


Search Now:
In Association with

Link Roll
American Politics Journal
Barry Crimmins
Betty Bowers
Consortium News 
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democatic Underground 
Disinfotainment Today 
Evil GOP Bastards
Faux News Channel 
Greg Palast
The Hollywood Liberal 
Internet Weekly
Jesus General
Joe Conason 
Josh Marshall
Liberal Oasis
Make Them Accountable 
Mark Morford 
Mike Malloy 
Political Humor -
Political Wire
Randi Rhodes
Rude Pundit 
Smirking Chimp
Take Back the Media
More Links


Locations of visitors to this page

Subject: Let the superdelegates decide

Dear Bart,

The nomination will have to be decided by Superdelegates if neither 
candidate withdraws. This upsets Obamatons to no end but I'm fine with it. 

I never heard of "superdelegates" until this year, and I don't have time to
investigate but one would assume they're here in case the party gets "stuck."
If they're supposed to rubber-stamp all previous decisions - why do they even exist?

Why not just let Pat Leahy do it and save all that extra time and money?

"The people rule!"

Obamatons (and media whores) claim it is undemocratic and they claim that as soon as 
their favorite got a few more pledged delegates the whole thing should have been over.  
Tweety Matthews even tried last night to angrily quote JFK - "believing in democracy 
means accepting a decision even it is only by one vote."

Yeah, but try governing when 49% of your own party doesn't support you.
Hillary even has experience with that :)

To me, that's the biggest problem - we can't win without each other.
Obama can't win without Hilly's people and vice-versa.

The Dem rules include superdelegates IN CASE THE VOTERS CAN'T MAKE A CLEAR CHOICE.  

I agree - for what other reason could they exist?

When there is a mere 100-200 difference in pledged delegates, the decision goes 
to the "adults" of the party because the "kids" can't make a clear choice. 

The superdelegates are not mysterious insiders who have an unfair weight to their decision. 
They are people who have either been elected to some office by huge numbers of Democrats 
or they are people who have sweated blood for the party.  

Plus, I imagine Obama has more of them, but still his people panic.

Obamatons are essentially saying: "It's unfair that people who have given years or decades 
of their lives to the party decide.  We think disloyal and fickle Independents (along with strategic 
Repubs trying to kill Clinton's chances) who carried Obama in tiny states should get to decide 
this for the Democratic Party." 

As Democrats, we are supposed to understand that in a situation like this both candidates 
are satisfactory to us - they are both Democrats and both express the views with which we 
essentially agree.  It's not like 2000 and a choice between extremes, with the Court deciding. 

Once the voters cause a virtual tie in this primary, we are supposed to be fine with letting 
superdelegates have the final say. 

Hammer On Bart!
 Jeff in Rochester, NY

  Back to

Send e-mail to Bart  |  Discuss it on The BartCop ForumComment on it at the BartBlog

Privacy Policy
. .