For my first diary I’ve created a multiple choice quiz. Self-scoring. No trick questions
1. Vermont Superdelegates should vote for:
(a) Bernie Sanders
(b) Hillary Clinton
(c) Bernie and Hillary in proportion to the vote
(d) Whoever wins the national popular vote and pledged delegate count
(e) Whoever they want to vote for!
2. Florida Superdelegates should vote for:
(a) Bernie Sanders
(b) Hillary Clinton
(c) Bernie and Hillary in proportion to the vote
(d) Whoever wins the national popular vote and pledged delegate count
(e) Whoever they want to vote for!
Extra Credit:
My answers to the two questions above were:
(a) Logically consistent and not partisan
(b) Other
--------------------------------
Answer Key:
There has been a lot of talk about superdelegates and how they should play out in the Democratic primary. I’ve seen a lot of comments that suggest double standards in how they’d like superdelegates to work. So let’s look at the answers above and see how they work in practice since it often takes diaries with 900 convoluted comments to boil down positions to something really simple.
If you answered (a) to question #1. OK – fine. Possible way it could work although not the way is actually does. But I can’t argue too vigorously. You basically want to give a bonus to statewide winners. BUT, then your only possible answer to question #2 should be (b). There is no way to justify Bernie getting all Vermont superdelegates without conceding the superdelegates in Hillary won states to her. If you answered (a) for #1 and anything other than (b) for #2, you failed the test. End result of (a): the winner of the popular vote and pledged delegate vote almost certainly wins! (Although I’m sure you could come up with some unlikely mathematically way for it to come out otherwise)
If you answered (b) to question #1. Go away. I support Hillary too but clearly you have some issues to deal with.
If you answered (c) to question #1. Principled position. Again, not the way it works but you basically want to do away with superdelegates since a proportionally allocation is pretty much what the pledged delegates are for. BUT as with question #1, you better have chosen (c) for question #2 as well if you want any chance of the extra credit question. End result of (c), the winner of the popular vote and pledged delegate vote wins!
If you answered (d) to question #1. Again, principled position and similar to awarding them based on state winner but on a national level. Hopefully you answered (d) to #2 as well otherwise I suspect you had someone else complete the test for you. End result of (d), the winner of the popular vote and pledged delegate vote wins!
If you answered (e), you went with the status quo. More complicated outcome because we have to look at what “could” happen verses what “has” happened and what “will likely” happen. But we are making assumptions. Again, this should have been your choice for both questions. We have not seen a situation where superdelegates overturned the will of the voters. That’s always a possibility but would result in certain disaster for the party and they know that. The much more likely result is that if one candidate has a pledged delegate lead, enough would switch if needed to preserve that lead. Can I guarantee that. Of course not. But no one has any evidence otherwise and I do have evidence to support my position. The most likely time superdelegates would come into play if we were in a position that the republicans are in now in which case superdelegates could play a very important role. We’re not that stupid . . . .yet . . . but we better watch how we act. End result of (e), the pledged delegate leader likely wins.
So let’s look at the scoring. In nearly every case the end result is that the national popular vote winner and pledged delegate winner becomes the nominee. This is particularly so in a 2-person race. The only way that this does not come to be, is if you are inconsistent in your answers to #1 and #2 (which means you failed the quiz), or you assume that superdelegates will overturn the will of the national majority.
Where a lot of people fall down in the arguments over Vermont is they look at this symbolically on a state level rather than realistically on a national level. But all votes are equal. You cannot be for adjusting the superdelegate system for just one candidate under one set up circumstances in certain states. Saying you want Bernie to have a majority of Vermont delegates when you count Superdelegates is basically the same thing as saying just get rid of Superdelegates. Which is a fine position to take (although I disagree as I believe they will act rationally so it’s good to have them in the wings). But if you want to do that, then it flows through to every state resulting in the national winner becoming the nominee anyway. Again – COULD the superdelegates overturn the will? Yes, yes they could. But they won’t. And anyone who argues that in a two-person race the superdelegates SHOULD overturn the will of a majority (note I said majority and not plurality) of voters fails this test.
As for who the superdelegates support along the way, they have as much right to speak out as to who they support as any other person in this country have as to who they support. Might it sway people. Maybe. But so do endorsement. So do political ads. So do rallies. The superdelegates prior to convention are a campaign tool just as many many other things are.
The end result of all of this is that there is a lot of argument based on hypotheticals. But in reality, the winner of the national vote will and should win the nomination. You cannot logically look at Hillary’s superdelegate lead today and say “but if she were behind it would flip the election” because she’s not behind. That assumes the fallacy that if she were behind that things wouldn’t change but history shows it would. The system we have isn’t perfect but it’s there for a reason.
So take a step back and look at your positions and see if they’re logically consistent in all situations.
My answers: I answered (e). I trust the superdelegates to understand the system and the likely results of overturning the will of a clear majority and believe if Bernie were to win a majority of pledged delegates enough superdelegates in states he won would switch.
