Bernie wants another role for superdelegates

bernie sanders wants to limit superdelegates influence

Even though he announced that he’s endorsing Hillary Clinton and will do everything possible in order to make sure that she will become President, Bernie Sanders still has one front that he’s fighting on: superdelegates.

After it was clear enough that he doesn’t have the required support to win the nomination, the Vermont Senator decided that endorsing Hillary would be a good idea, as he could use his party influence to obtain what he wants in some way or another.

Dragging Hillary’s campaign to the left?

According to CS Monitor, Bernie Sanders was after obtaining a $15 national minimum wage, stricter regulations on fracking, and a public option in Obamacare. However, now he wants to continue pushing his platform at the Democratic National Convention, scheduled for next month, in Philadelphia, with one big purpose: changing the system of superdelegates.

“We have some serious concerns, and I expect some of those concerns may wind up on the floor of the convention,” Bernie Sanders said in an interview for The Washington Post.

Superdelegates are basically free to support any candidate they want in the nomination process, their group consisting in party leaders, elected officials, senators, representatives and governors.

It’s not a secret that this group had a big role in allowing Hillary Clinton to reach the number of delegates required to clinch the nomination. What Bernie Sanders wants is to reduce their numbers and influence in the nomination process and he will present his proposition on July 25.

Democrats need unity!

Of course, his idea attracted a lot of criticism, as a lot of observers claim that this is far from what the Democrats need right now, when they should be united and focus on Hillary’s campaign.

Even more, Bernie wants to allow independents as well as Democrats to vote in all state primaries and caucuses, encouraging some states that hold caucuses to expand voting hours, so more people can cast their options.

  • Pj Alexander

    Superdelegates are endowed with too much power and have forgotten they were elected to represent their constituents. I think we should remove the votes of those elected to serve before we endow them this super status next go round. Shame on them all for accepting the imbalance of power if they ignore polls and articles that reveal Clinton as the most disliked and distrusted and weak candidate in Democratic history to present against trump in the general. Clinton might not be trump, but she is no Sanders, and only Sanders has earned the trust and respect of the electorate necessary to ensure a Democratic white house and Democrat wins down ballot. Superdelegates beware if you push the wrong button in your haste to brown nose Clinton the disliked distrusted lying liar, you won’t be able to point to anyone but yourselves when she tanks under upcoming Clinton Foundation connections, email leaks and State Department reports, much less the lies she spews like a daily ritual.

    • Korian73

      SuperDelegates almost always back the candidate with the most overall votes. What did HRC gather in votes? Over FIVE Million more than BS. BS did not have the support of Democratic Party voters, HRC did, and that’s why she’s the presumptive Democratic Party Nominee, not BS.

      • Pj Alexander

        That’s pretty funny and dangerously ignorant!
        Then why did almost all the superdelegates back Clinton prior to Sanders entering the race before a single vote was cast?
        You do realize Clinton won the popular vote in 2008 when Obama took the white house don’t you?
        Superdelegates are unbound and were created to avoid a weak candidate that would lose in the general, to give the party more control over the selection. Period.
        This election cycle is the penultimate test of whether they will exercise their ability to think for themselves and protect the future of the Democratic story or will bow to insider politics and place the entire nation at a huge risk of a trump presidency, and lose positions down ballot to determined organized republicans.
        Please use your head and consider that Clinton’s 3 million vote lead would have been erased in NY state ALONE if Independents could have voted, and Independents WILL vote in the general and are NOT rallying behind this flawed disliked distrusted corrupt presumptive nominee.
        Close to half of the Democrats, almost all of the Independents (which are the LARGEST voting block at 40% of the electorate) and many of the Republicans will not vote for Clinton, and the superdelegates are challenged to choose wisely.

        • Jackson Adkins

          Most independents are young people who aren’t going to vote anyways.

          If the Sander’s supporters want to let Trump get elected because their favorite politican didn’t win, then that is on them. They are the ones choosing to self destruct and bringing the rest of us down with them.

          • Pj Alexander

            Independents cover all age brackets while also enjoying the same voting demographic that ushered Obama into the white house in 08.
            You remember 08 when Clinton had won the majority of votes yet Obama won the nomination don’t you?
            It is Clinton tanking to trump right now in the polls and Sanders hasn’t been on them for a while, so If you want to point your under educated fingers at others and whine when she continues to tank go ahead, that doesn’t make her any more palatable nor electable nor voted for.
            This 55 year old, registered voting Democrat with many Democratic and Independent peers remains Never Clinton. Never trump.
            You and your crony lobbyist big bank entrenched sycophants are the ones pushing the Democratic party off the cliff.

    • Korian73

      You sound more like a Trump supporter than a Sanders supporter. I’m sorry, but I’d rather have Sec’y Clinton be President then a misogynistic bigoted prejudicial Mr. Trump.

      (Face it, BS is out of the picture now, he supports HRC and wants her to be our next President.

      • Pj Alexander

        A) Sanders did not concede, he is still an active candidate and his delegates will be able to cast a vote for him at the convention.
        B) An endorsement is not a concession; FDR endorsed his opponent prior to the convention then went on to win the nomination and the presidency.
        C) Clinton’s vote lead of 3 million would have been erased in NTY state alone if Independents had been allowed to vote, and they WILL vote in the general and have not rallied behind flawed lying corrupt presumptive nominee Clinton.
        D) If you really don’t want a trump presidency, as you claim, then support Sanders. Clinton is weak and id disliked and distrusted for reasons, not made up issues. She is basically tied with trump in valid polls and will only sink further going into November with each new Clinton Foundation revelation, State Department probe report, email leak, and lie that she spews. She IS NOT the choice of the electorate in a year that demands change.
        Sanders has performed as the strongest candidate to defeat trump in a general throughout this entire election process and continues to do so today when included in polls and EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

        • Jackson Adkins

          Sanders is not going to win. I wanted him to, but people didn’t vote for him so he is not, accept it. All your doing is making Sander’s supporters look like Trump’s.

          People won’t rally around Sander’s either. The fact of the matter is that the GOP has smeared Clinton’s name in a manner that is McCarthy-like. And you and some other democrats have let them fool you into believing it. The GOP has taken you for a ride. We need a strong politician to deal with the GOP, Sanders was like Obama was. They both made promises that simply aren’t possible with the most obstructionist congress in history.

          • Pj Alexander

            3 million registered Independents were not allowed to vote in New York state alone my friend. The closed Democratic primaries did not reflect his support and that is very well known, as is the DNC scale tipping during the entire race and MSM collusion that falsified voter support.
            Clinton’s record, the current resistance to her and strong dislike of her is earned by her, and has nothing to do with the crybabies who say she is being smeared.
            Her own lies, flip flops, selling her vote on Iraq to Bush, and Clinton Foundation donor appointments etc etc have found her out.
            My goodness, have you seen how many times she lied about landing in Bosnia under sniper fire? She does not misspeak, she lies repeatedly. She lies about her grandparents being immigrants. She lies about her role in policy creation.She lies about lying, and her lies under oath about her emails when testifying about Benghazi might soon enough send her to jail.
            Finally, Clinton’s “win” is debatable after the Stanford and Berkeley study points to wide spread election fraud and so many states are in court claiming just that.
            You are going to have to search in the darkest of corners to find voters who are unfamiliar with exactly how compromised and corrupt Clinton is, 60% are now calling for an alternate choice and that number is only expected to increase.
            To nominate Clinton is to vote for trump, the majority of electorate knows we can do better than her.

  • Korian73

    SuperDelegates need to remain as they are – a way to stop Party outsiders from hijacking the Presidential Nomination. Do you all remember George Wallace? He was the bigoted Southern Governor who opposed desegregation. He tried, as an outsider, for the Democratic Party Nomination and got fairly close to winning. After that fiasco, the DNC did not want another Party outsider coming in, they wanted to ensure that a dedicated Party Loyalist would always win their nomination. This is why the SuperDelegates were created in the first place. One has to remember that it always takes a combination of regular Delegates and SuperDelegates to win.

    For this current nomination, BS came in as an outsider. He knew from the start what he was up against. I sincerely believe that if Bernie had been a lifelong Democrat (instead of an Independent), he would have had the full support of the SuperDelegates and would have won the nomination.

    As for opening up the Primaries, I have to say no. Again, you should be a Party member in order to vote in that Primary. To let just anyone vote would defeat the needs of a Political Party itself. Anyway, what’s so wrong about declaring yourself to be a member of a Political Party?

    And Caucuses should be changed to Statewide voting. Caucuses are inherently unfair because they can be stacked with one candidate’s group. They do not actually represent the area in which they are done.