The Maniac or the Cheater: The Case for Ending the Undemocratic Super Delegate fiasco

In the Democratic nominating process, 15% of delegates are not elected.  These chosen few exist to ensure that the nominee is an establishment party elite and to prevent a viable challenge by a Democratic maverick:  a candidate with “outside the box” ideas and programs.  The intent is to prevent substantive modifications to the Democratic Party goals and directions.
 

This process stifles change, assures the Party will carry on old stale policies, and is undemocratic.   This Super Delegate scam bears resemblance to nations with controlled elections where party orthodoxy is ensured by the appointment, not election, of party loyalists.  The intent is to prevent new ideas from affecting Party ideology and suppress alternative programs.

The Democrats use Super Delegates to appoint Party loyalists and suppress any challenge to the traditional platform, no matter how bankrupt and antiquated it may be.   We live in a fluid changing world.  Refusal to adapt to these changes locks us into the old ways.  A static party is a failed party.   Observe how Trump rises while Clinton sinks under the weight of her insincerity, empty promises, scandals, and most sadly her pandering to the requirements of her billionaire corporate masters.   These tactics have made Bill and Hillary Clinton wealthy.  Coincidence?  I think not.

Super Delegates are appointed, not elected.  This practice is clearly undemocratic.  While 15% of delegate votes may not seem large at a quick glance, it translates to a 700 delegate advantage before any primary or caucus has occurred.   In a close race, it guarantees the establishment elite of the victory imperative they require.

In this election cycle, Super Delegates were appointed prior to Bernie Sanders decision to run.  At that point Hillary Clinton was thought to be the only serious Democrat running for the nomination.  It stands to reason that with no known serious competition at that time, Super Delegates flocked to the side of Clinton.  Bernie Sanders was not yet a candidate at that point.

The system flies in the face of Democracy.  There are too many cases where, although Bernie won state primaries and caucuses decisively, his victories have been nullified by Super Delegates defying the state results.   When Bernie wins a clear majority of pledged delegates, it counts for nothing when Super Delegates are factored in.  These appointed elites skew the will of the voting public. 

Is this the way of Democracy?

Not only does this system pollute our one person one vote Democracy, it severely handicaps a legitimate but unconventional candidate.  The result is to preserve old outdated party orthodoxy and prevent growth and change which would perhaps allow the Party to actually evolve to relevancy.  The super delegate system weakens the party and may lead to the unthinkable:  President Trump.

There is one more aspect to this fiasco, perhaps the most damaging of all.   The Clinton friendly corporate media consistently reports delegate counts including Super Delegates who cannot cast their votes until the convention.  This inaccurate reporting gives the candidate with Super Delegate advantage the appearance of a commanding lead, somewhere in the neighborhood of a 500 unelected delegate advantage even though Super Delegates have not voted.  I believe this biased reporting serves to suppress voting in the last scheduled primaries and caucuses.  Why should Bernie supporters come out to vote when, according to the media, the nomination is already decided?  Is it fair to deny California voters their say in the process?

I accuse Hillary Clinton, Debby Wasserman Shultz, and the establishment media of conspiracy to swing the nomination to Clinton.  If Clinton were able to convince voters that her policies had more merit than those of Sanders, I would be disappointed but resigned that she won on issues.  However, this nomination has been characterized by cheating, voter suppression, registered Democrats who are suddenly dropped from the registered Democratic rolls, and the support of the biased media all too willing to skew facts in favor everybody’s anointed darling candidate.  Why were more than 100.000 registered Democrats in Brooklyn alone disenfranchised?

In 1992, after six years on the board of directors of Walmart, Hillary became first lady with Bill’s election.   At that point, Hillary set her goal to being the first woman president.  Electing a female president is a fine goal and one that will certainly happen in short time.  However, electing a President based on gender is insufficient in itself.  Under the premise that we must have a female President, why not elect Sarah Palin or Carly Fiorina.  They pass the gender test which seems to be the overriding claim of Hillary Clinton to the nomination.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are not of the people.  They are wealthy elitists who consider themselves above the American voters.  I encourage voters to think long and hard about anything either Clinton has done to improve the lot of ordinary people.   Their purpose has always been to promote the interests of large banks, fossil fuel industry, big Pharma and various Billionaire controlled corporations. 

The Clintons are as Republican as Donald Trump.  If Bernie does not win the nomination, the American people will be asked to choose between a maniac and a cheater.  Not since 1968 general election between Hubert Humphrey (the equivalent of 2016 Hillary Clinton) and the evil and corrupt criminal Richard Nixon have the American people faced two so deficient candidates.  Either way, the people lose.

The Super Delegate system has got to go.  It is undemocratic in its nature and serves to handicap a candidate such as Bernie Sanders who is one of the people, not superior elite.  The Super Delegate system exists to prevent substantive change in the Party’s goals and methods.

The Clinton narrative is that Bernie Sanders is inexperienced and would be unable to work with the legislators.   When Clinton was enjoying board status with the employee bashing and cheapskate Walmart corporation, Bernie Sanders was making his mark as a champion of the people as eight year Mayor of Burlington, Vermont.  While Hillary Clinton exulted in the semi monarchist first lady role, Bernie Sanders was making a strong impact as congressman and Senator even with his status of the longest serving Independent in the history of the legislature and his innovative if unorthodox ideas.  He continues to serve successfully for 25 years in the legislature.  Bernie knows the Congress and Senate and has successfully worked with both sides of the isle in the exclusive interest of the people.

Without the undemocratic Super Delegate system, Bernie would likely be the Democratic nominee.  He has already won the hearts and imagination of Democratic voters.  Hillary will likely lose to Trump while Bernie defeats Trump by large margins.  Bernie is clean and honest, liked and trusted by voters.  Bernie has positive ideas and issues.  Clinton has baggage.

One last point and I will conclude this tome.  All states should have open primaries.  That allows independents (42% of the voting public) to have a say in the nominating process.  Any registered voter is allowed to choose a party ballot and vote their conscience.  Why should Independents be denied access to our “democratic” nominating process?  That practice also works in favor of the Democratic Party establishment elite and is yet another example of voter suppression.

I deplore Republican tactics.  Unfortunately Democrats employ similar dishonest tactics. 

The Democratic Party must reform, return to the FDR new deal pro people platform or perish.  The demise of the Democratic Party as we know it now is necessary to the preservation of democracy in America.