2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary’s statement on superdelegates
This was from an interview from, as best I can tell, around May 7, 2008. I did the transcription and added emphasis.
BRIAN WILLIAMS: How does this end, and when?
HILLARY CLINTON: Well, I think, Brian, it ends after everyones had a chance to vote,
after we have decided how were going to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates, which
I hope happens on May 31st. We have less than three weeks to go until everyones had
a chance to be heard. And then its going to be up to the Democratic party, all of the
delegates, ah, most particularly those who are still uncommitted, ah, to make their
determination as to who they think would be the best president and the better candidate.
But at some point, well know who has 2,210 delegates. I think well have a nominee, um,
I really believe that, but, again, well know a lot more on June 4th and, uh, maybe I just have,
ah, more patience than, ah, the average person these days but, ah, for me its ah, a privilege
and a joy to travel around our country to make my case to, ah, people from one coast to the
other and, ah, to ah, continue to ah , you know, work as hard as I can to win this nomination
and thats what I intend to do and, you know, well get to, ah, June the 4th, ah, after the last
votes are cast on June the 3rd and I think well have a better idea about where we stand.
BW: For you to be the nominee it would take a wholesale shift of ah, super-delegates,
in effect, overturning, um, the pledged delegates and those individual state elections.
Would you be comfortable with that?
HC: Well, I think that, ah, the super-delegates are there for a purpose, that is to, ah,
determine who they think would be the stronger candidate and the best President. Ah,
super-delegates are not bound to vote any way, they can change their minds, ah, they
can go to the convention and change their minds, there is no , ah, guarantee and in fact,
its equally true for pledged delegates for most states. Ah, obviously people are going to
look at the results, but I think that its also important to look at where the delegates came
from, ah, how many people actually elected those delegates, what the kind of, ah, ah,
outcomes were, who has a, a bigger base to build an electoral majority on. But at the end
of the day, Brian, you know, maybe its because we live in such a, a media bubble and its
24-7 and theres such an intense interest in this campaignEverybody should just take a
deep breath. Were gonna know a lot more in about three weeks than we do right now and
and that is More than enough time for us to unify our party for us to be, you know, absolutely
committed to ah, ah winning in November and I, I believe thats whats going to happen.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)nilram
(2,894 posts)the super-delegates are there for a purpose, that is to, ah, determine who they think would be the stronger candidate and the best President
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Sanders is the type of candidate we want to avoid; thus, we have superdelegates.
nilram
(2,894 posts)But to me, an undesirable extremist is a politician who takes extreme amounts of money from financial institutions and votes to start unnecessary wars.
IamMab
(1,359 posts)Oh, right...
Arkansas Granny
(31,540 posts)nilram
(2,894 posts)and that seems like the essence of a contested convention. (Though I'll admit I don't know the formal definition of 'contested convention,' if there is one.)
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Most of the large states had already voted on Super Tuesday (including California and New York), which had 23 contests as opposed to this year, which had only 12. At that date, the candidates were in a virtual dead heat, with Clinton leading 1,056 to Obama's 1,036 pledged delegates. By early May (again, the schedule was very different that year, and the total number of delegates considerably smaller), Obama had gotten ahead by about 100 pledged delegates--a number thought to be too big to catch up to. By the end, the pledged delegate count was nearly even: 1,794½ for Obama, 1,732½ for Clinton. And the super delegates had been much more divided all along. Since candidates have a good idea, based on internal polling how subsequent states would turn out in general, there was reason for Clinton to believe there was a fighting chance, at least. She conceded after the last primary. True, Obama had gained the necessary number of pledged delegates at that point. But she was very close: never did she vow to take it to the convention in the hopes that the super delegates would erase Obama's lead.
This year, Sanders trails by some 300 pledged delegates and millions of the popular vote, a story I do not have to repeat here; and there are only a dozen or so contests left. Short of the anticipated plane crash or indictment many here hope for, there is little chance for Sanders to close the gap enough to move a preponderance of super delegates. If Clinton couldn't close that gap with a much much tighter race in 2008, I see the hope-clinging among Sanders supporters to be hanging by a very fragile thread indeed.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)At the convention the nominee will be decided and not one minute before. All of the supers can change their minds and so now it is up to the People to make sure the supers vote correctly by voting to nominate Bernie!
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)I think Bernie will as well.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)that the pledged delegate winner would be considered the rightful nominee.
Hillary hadn't been told that heading into the 2008 race. Sanders was well aware of that heading into the 2016 race.
pampango
(24,692 posts)it will be interesting to see which camp (or both?) switch their take on what the role of superdelegates should be.
As path narrows, Sanders asks party insiders to back his bid
Bernie Sanders acknowledged Sunday that his uphill climb to the Democratic nomination depends on winning over superdelegates, the elected officials, lobbyists and other party insiders who are free to back either candidate.
Its an admission that even some of his own aides call ironic, given that Sanders has focused his campaign on taking down what he calls a corrupt political establishment. The Vermont senator formally joined the Democratic Party a year ago, after serving decades in Congress as a self-identified democratic socialist.
In a press conference organized to mark the year anniversary of his insurgent bid, Sanders called on superdelegates to reflect the vote in their state. He also cast himself as more electable against Donald Trump, arguing that superdelegates should prioritize beating the GOP frontrunner over other concerns.
To win the nomination, Sanders would have to flip hundreds of superdelegates, far more than the several dozens that changed from Clinton to support then Illinois Sen. Barack Obama eight years ago. Sanders would also have to convince superdelegates to vote against the national pledged delegate leader an unprecedented political maneuver.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/as-path-narrows-sanders-asks-party-insiders-to-back-his-bid/2016/05/01/13aaedd4-0ffb-11e6-a9b5-bf703a5a7191_story.html
Most of us seem to have serious reservations about the existence and power of superdelegates. When you are behind in pledged delegates going into the convention as Hillary was in 2008 and as Bernie will likely be in 2016 (though I hope he somehow takes the lead in the remaining 10 states), I guess the superdelegates become a lot more of an appealing option than they should be in theory.