Superdelegates, and how they could change the fate of a nation

With neither Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton able to carve out a clear lead in the Democratic race, talk is increasingly turning to the possibility that superdelegates might, for the first time since their inception in the 1980s, decide the presidential nominee.

So what is a superdelegate, and why do they matter?

This stratum of turbo-charged voters constitute around 20 per cent of Democratic delegates who decide the nominee (Republicans have far fewer, just 123, who I'll come back to later.)

They are made up primarily of Democratic National Committee officials, members of Congress, governors and Democratic notables such as former presidents and congressional leaders. Some, meanwhile, are elected at state conventions.

Sometimes referred to as unpledged delegates, superdelegates are not bound to support any particular nominee. So far, around half have declared their voting intentions, with Hillary Clinton commanding a sizeable lead, but as these could change their mind right up to the last the former first lady can't bank them yet.

With the two rivals neck-and-neck when it comes to your average, common or garden delegate, it is these souped-up versions which may tip the nomination one way or the other.

The Republican party has no superdelegates per se, but it does have 123 unpledged delegates which function the same way.

For further information on superdelegates, CNN has a useful guide here.

What is the current state of play?

CNN estimates that Clinton currently has the support of at least 224 superdelegates compared with at least 135 superdelegates for Obama. The remaining 400 or so superdelegates either remain neutral, undecided or have not declared their intentions.

Though the former first lady appears to have a significant advantage,  Obama has picked up a string of high-profile superdelegate endorsements in recent weeks, including from Senators Ted Kennedy and John Kerry of Massachusetts, which could convince others to fall into line.

And, while there are currently 796 Democratic superdelegates, these numbers may still change in the months leading up to the August convention as people die, leave office or leave the Democratic Party. There is also the issue of Michigan and Florida, which have had their delegates barred from the convention as a penalty for holding their primaries early. If these are reinstated as Clinton wants, or, as has been mooted, the primaries are repeated, the superdelegate total would climb.

Of the 123 Republican unpledged delegates, 26 have so far declared their support for John McCain, while three are backing Mike Huckabee, the lone remaining challenger.

2008 Democratic Convention Watch has handy lists of superdelegate endorsements and those who haven't yet declared.

Superdelegates in the media

The New York Times is reporting rumblings among Clinton superdelegates, concerned that the one time presumptive nominee is on a losing streak that could be difficult to turn around:

"Several Clinton superdelegates, whose votes could help decide the nomination, said Monday that they were wavering in the face of Mr. Obama’s momentum after victories in Washington State, Nebraska, Louisiana and Maine last weekend.

"Some said that they, like the hundreds of uncommitted superdelegates still at stake, might ultimately “go with the flow,” in the words of one, and support the candidate who appears to show the most strength in the primaries to come. "

Jesse Jackson Jr, himself a superdelegate, is railing in the Chicago Tribune about the possibility of this hand-picked elite making a mockery of the primary process:

"I would suggest that this is a time that Democratic superdelegates should tread lightly. Let's not get in the way of our rising tide. Let's allow grass-roots voters to choose the 2008 presidential nominee for the Democratic Party, not party elites... Let's see if the voters point us in a clear direction, and rather than intervening to change that direction, we superdelegates can ratify their decision."

Mother Jones is calling for superdelegates to sign a pledge that they will only support the candidate that has the most regular delegates, arguing:

"If enough superdelegates vote for the second-place finisher, it could vault him or her into the lead (and the nomination), and the nominee will have essentially been chosen against "the will of the majority (however slight it might be) of Democratic voters."

"Such a result would almost certainly be a disaster for the Democrats. It would embitter the losing candidates' supporters, make the winner seem weak, make the party appear divided and undemocratic, and open the nominee to GOP attacks that he or she "wasn't even picked by the majority of his or her party." It would seriously endanger the Democrats' chances in November."

Dan Abrams on the Huffington Post calls on all superdelegates to simply vote the same way as their state did:

"Each of the superdelegates' votes is now equivalent to about 10,000 Democratic voters. With the candidates almost tied in delegates to date and with battles brewing over currently disqualified delegates from Florida and Michigan, the Democrats must move now--before the fight moves from a principled one to a purely political one. Once it becomes clear exactly how the superdelegates will impact the vote, an objective assessment will be impossible."

DC superdelegate Eleanor Holmes Norton is quoted on NPR's News Blog as saying that this was a problem that was never anticipated:

"She told Tell Me More (radio show) that if there is a perception that superdelegates are in a "back room" deciding who the nominee will be, people will feel their votes didn't count in the primaries and caucuses. She also said some superdelegates may have trouble if they take a position that is different from the way the Democrats in their state voted.

""I'm not sure we ever thought this through the way we should," she said. "No one anticipated a possible tie.""

Comments

[Ray]

Superdelegates will start breaking for Obama, as his momentum appears unstoppable. Voters, activists, other delegates and members of Congress will revolt if it seems as if there's a back-room deal afoot to help Hillary Clinton if she's not ahead in popular votes or the regular delegates.

[Brett Champion]

The way I see the superdelegates functioning at the Democratic convention is to either A) ratify the voters' decision during the primaries, or B) undo an obvious mistake. By an obvious mistake, I mean that, regardless of who is the nominee, something comes out about him or her between the end of the primary season and the beginning of the convention that would make him or her unelectable. You can fill in the blank about what that might be, but, so long as the eventual nominee comes through to the convention intact, then he or she should get the support of most of the superdelegates, if not all of them.

[John Lindsay]

Why Hillary Will Lose The Democratic Nomination- loved but no longer feared. 500 years ago Machiavelli advised it was better to be feared than loved. In her bid for the Democratic nomination Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) will lose because while her core of supporters love her, the super delegates no longer fear her. For sake of brevity let us assume her money situation keeps her competitive, racial and gender number do not drastically shift, and her negative numbers remain historically in the mid 30 percent range. I would suggest none of that will impact the eventual outcome. Let us further assume that Mr. Obama and HRC roughly split delegates between now and the convention and neither has enough delegates to declare victory. What happens next? We are told the nomination will be decided by super delegates, individuals who hold public office or are part of the Democratic structure. If HRC was already in the Oval Office she could push and pull the levers of power and fear in a way that would strongly influence how super delegates would vote. Most of us would expect any incumbent sitting in the Oval Office to employ a similar strategy. However, HRC is not sitting in the Oval Office. She is simply a New York senator who is married to a former president. Close but not quite the same. Super delegates may be party hacks but they are also political hacks and they are probably beginning to realize Mr. Obama is pulling ahead. No need to put your finger in the wind when the wind is so strong you can barely stand. Some super delegates may not care but most super delegates will not want the press back home to learn that even though Mr. Obama carried their state they voted for HRC. Further there will be a tipping point when the super delegates begin to realize if enough of them get behind Mr. Obama they have nothing to fear from HRC. Once the super delegates lose the fear of HRC it is only logical they will throw their support to Mr. Obama. Indeed, in our personal lives we all hope we are loved rather than feared but in the backrooms of the Democratic nomination process the fear of HRC is subsiding, the tipping point is nearing, and the natural beneficiary of this phenomena will be Mr. Obama.

[Chris Toney]

"I'm not sure we ever thought this through the way we should...", could be a universal statement on the Democratic Party and it's ideas.

This isn't something complex such as the war on terror, this is something simple - how to manage their own party politics. It makes me nervous to think that these folks wish to make policy for the whole world.

[Cllr Ken Tiwari (independent)]

We all knows why media trying to break it's
back, to promote Barak Obama, because if
Barak Obama is Democrat's, Candidate for
this USA-presidency election, then Republican candidate sure to win, I can only
pray to all american voters, to help USA, by
voting for Hillary Clinton; she's a hard working senator,and caring human-sister, i
think, God bless us All: Cllr Ken Tiwari(UK)

[Argyll (Scotland)]

Cllr Tiwari,

I think you need to read more on the way the general election in November will play out. If the Democrats want to win in November they should elect Obama with Edwards on the ticket to ensure four things:

1. that the Republicans focus more on the weakness of their own candidate than on beating the opponent. Many right-wingers are naturally sceptical of McCain but If Clinton wins the nomination it will galvanise Republican support like nothing else - espcially if Huckabee's on the ticket.

2. That independents vote Democrat. Many would much rather vote for a bi-partisan conservative such as McCain, than a raving leftie like Hillary. If Obama wins the nomination they can vote for "change" and feel good about themselves but still vote for someone in the centre ground.

3. Edwards on the ticket would ensure blue collar white male support.

4. Age will come into this race at some point. If McCain was to win in November he would be the oldest President in the country's history. the rigours of a campaign might start to tell and Obama has youth and vitality very much on his side.

Obama has the Big Mo, get on board!

[Roy Sulyly]

The Democratic Nominee contest is getting very interesting. At this point in time, I belief strogly that the so called respected Super Hawk Democratic Delegates may eventually come to the Rescue of not only their Presidential Nominee but their Democratic Supporters the Independents followers and the Newly converted Republicans.

Whilst the Super H Delegates shall be looking into the interest in the current National supports for their beloved party, hence they will have to summoned courage to vote currectly inorder to protect Democratic National supports and equally by the total of National pledge Delagates for each of the contenders.

As such, It is very importatnt for each of the SHD to put into consideration which way their vote should go when this acts is deemed necessary in August Democrtatic Convention.

The Political Nominee field is still open but for now the Thinking and Assumption of what can happen should start to metamorphisis.

Long Live American Democrats, Long Live the Independents, Long live converted Republican.

[Michael]

"No one anticipated a possible tie."
Yeah, right. If this was in any way true, then why even have them? Oh, that's right. It was to blunt the effect of the nuttier fringes of the party who might choose someone who, say, screams at weird times.