As the days press on, and the nights get shorter, the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination becomes increasingly intense, with an almost neck and neck competition. It has been a great month for Barack Obama, and his constant wins in this favourable last few weeks has just about shot him ahead of Clinton in delegate counts. Despite this, Clinton remains strong, campaigning in delegate rich Texas and Ohio hoping to secure her chance of the nomination. However, the issue of “Super Delegates” has been cropping up in the media quite recently, and it has caused quite a stir. Some people oppose them, others support, and some simply don’t know what they are.
So what exactly is a Super Delegate? First we need to establish that the votes cast in the primaries and caucuses are for delegates; people who are pledged to vote for a candidate on behalf of the public at the National Convention, which for the Democrats, is in the August of 2008. Now, onto Super Delegates; a super delegate is just like a regular delegate, only it does not have to commit itself to the candidate the public has voted in favour of. Twenty percent of the elected delegates are Super Delegates, meaning that 20% of the elected delegates will not have to vote for the candidate the public have voted for. Pretty undemocratic, pretty confusing.
Barack Obama has spoken out against the independent nature of the Super Delegates and has said that he urges the Super Delegates to “respect the voters wishes” where as Hillary Clinton has urged the Super Delegates to use their expertise in making an independent decision. Clinton’s attitude towards Super Delegates is quite an obvious one, as generally the Super Delegate process tends to favour her. However, many of the African American Super Delegates have recently abandoned the Clinton campaign and have been seen to be backing Obama, giving even more of a hopeful lead both in Delegates and Super Delegates. Super Delegates can mean a lot to the candidates in the Democratic race. For one, it is possible with the percentage of Super Delegates at stake, that they may be able to determine the outcome of the election. For example, the popular vote could entail Obama the winner of the Nomination, but Super Delegate votes could tip the nomination over to Clinton, regardless of the publics vote and vice versa; somewhat like Al Gore’s loss of the presidency in 2000.
In the 1984 presidential primaries, the two front runners for the democratic nomination were Gary Hart and Walter Mondale. Although both candidates won various primaries and caucuses, Hart was just slightly behind Mondale in the number of votes cast. However, Mondale had the backing of almost all the Super Delegates, and won the nomination. Super Delegates are being met with a largely negative response in the media and by the American people. They are seen as a negative because the process of Super Delegate votes undermines the vote of the people, and therefore undermines democracy in the United States. If the electorate feels that their vote can be easily over ridden so to speak, it takes away a lot of the significance of voting, and de-motivates the voter to go out and vote. This can have a negative effect on spirit, turnout and party loyalty, as people may be turned off the Democratic Party in the primary season due to Super Delegates.
In a recent poll, 80% of Democrats have stated that they are more enthused to go out and vote, where as 50% of republicans expressed less motivation. The democrats are experiencing a revolution on social and civil rights, with the two front running candidates being a Black man and a white Woman, the first of their kind, and both running in the same Primary season. Also, the unpopularity of President George W. Bush has urged people to cry out for change, and as we saw in the 2006 Mid Term Congressional Elections; the Democrats have been the alternative for change after the abysmal Republican presidency of the last eight years. This leads us onto the Republican Party; where turnout is dropping as party unity falls to pieces. The party is completely split, and the drop out’s of Huckabee and Romney have shown weakness in the GOP, because the Republicans are left with one front running candidate they are very uncertain about; Sen. John McCain. The scepticism from conservatives surrounding John McCain has further highlighted the split in the party, with conservatives like former Secretary of State Colin Powell expressing his uncertainty on his vote for the GOP. However, one thing the Republicans don’t have to worry about is Super Delegates, as they originate in the Democratic National Convention of 1968, and the separate conventions outline separate rules for each party.
The controversy surrounding Super Delegates could effect the presidential election in November. If the feared does happen, and the Super Delegates do vote against the popular vote, the Democratic candidate will face a legitimacy issue, and their mandate will be questionable. Can the Democrats afford this kind of unrest at such a crucial time in their party’s history? Can the party let the Republicans take hold of the presidency for yet another term? Let’s hope not, because the party divide in the Republican Party is so hectic, that it would be comforting to think there is at least one semi-stable party in the country. In all these senses, Super Delegates do not seem fair at all. However, they are often seen as one of the many reliable checks and balances in American Politics that ensure that no single branch of government can become too powerful. For example, it can be seen that Super Delegates are used to prevent any extremist dictators of such ideologies as communism or fascism getting elected, even if they do manage to captivate the public vote. Although a credible balance, it simply isn’t enough to account for the undemocratic image that Super Delegates have attained this Primary season. Super Delegates have been around for decades, but the unpopularity of the Bush administration has raised interest and therefore awareness into the electoral process, and many corruptions and questionable processes are now being met with some hostility.
Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi has been seen to be speaking out against the use of Super Delegates, and she has suggested that they should be pledged voters like the rest of the delegates. It would be extremely ideal for all the Super Delegates to vote according to the popular vote, but if this was so, why are they there in the first place? Do we even need Super Delegates? What we do know, however, is that although Obama is ahead in the Polls for both of tomorrows elections in Wisconsin and Washington State, which could push him even further ahead in the nomination; Clinton continues to maintain a likely win on delegate rich Texas and Ohio, and still has many Super Delegates backing her campaign. This brings the candidates back to the neck and neck status they have been in for some time. All we can do is keep waiting and watching to see what happens in August; this contest is long from over, and if anything, it is only just beginning.
No comments:
Post a Comment