How does a sellout chimp like this get to be a superdelegate?

/seems nobody gives a shiat about the COUNTRY

Whatever standing he has within the Democratic party that allows him to be a superdelegate should be revoked ASAP. This is absolutely revolting.

Just the other day, I was wonder why superdelegates commit to a candidate so early, when they could be receiving BJs from both sides for months on end.

Wow, that's legal?

Yeah.. because Superdelegates are smarter and better than the rest of us.

Jesus f*cking Christ the DNC has to get this sh*t under control.

Whatever standing he has within the Democratic party that allows him to be a superdelegate should be revoked ASAP. This is absolutely revolting.

Seconded. The DNC definitley needs to back-up and punt here. IMHO, the logic behind superdelegates = utter failure as-is, because:

1. The odds of a candidate commiting political suicide, where they have won the majority of delegates, but not quite enough.. so the superdelegates are able to step-in and fix things.

Would appear to be pretty damn equal to:

2. The odds of a candidate securing the nomination beyond the super-delegates reach and then commiting political suicide.

= ???

Eliminate this retardation, eliminate superdelegates and stop promoting potential failures. If you promote one, suck it up and take your loss. This loss is not worth disenfranchising the whole damn party.

It's the free market in action!

American democracy, what a wonderful sight to behold.

Because all votes are equal, but some votes are more equal than others.

"Nobody's said I'm crazy," said Ybarra.

either thats a typo or I think he's crazy

Ybarra wants every cent of the $20 million to go toward registering and educating eligible Mexican-American voters, who he calls the key to the white house.

I like it!

Within the system that exists, this seems a perfectly reasonable way for a delegate to decide how to vote - it is no different, surely, to gainig votes in the senate by tacking on sweetners to individual districts/states and causes, and many other similar deals that are very much a part of most representative forms of government.

when i saw this headline on drudge last night i was pissed, but then when you RTFA he's actually not all that unreasonable. plus, he's absolutely right. with 1 mil + new regs in the SW this map becomes a lot easier.

i'm sure pander bear will be on the case.

That might have worked a month ago.

I'm pretty sure that's illegal.

It's actually not THAT crazy. It's not like he wants the money for himself.

But Hillary can't pay $20 million and Obama probably won't, so end of story.

RTFA

The $20M isn't for him. Damn, what a terrible article.

At least he's open about it, unlike John Edwards.

How's that "make me the AG" tactic working?

A lot of people only read headlines...in my fark?

/Hell yeah!

FeloniousQ: i'm sure pander bear will be on the case.

Hey! Don't call me out.

They all trade for favors and power. He's just acting like a no-haggle car dealer instead of dickering in a closed room as they have always done in the past.

Yesdog: It's the free market in action!

Yup, this is a Real American^TM. Hurray for capitalism.

acanuck: How does a sellout chimp like this get to be a superdelegate?

/seems nobody gives a shiat about the COUNTRY

It is not about the country (sadly). It is about your own special interest, and we are all special intersts to include:

The supposedly vicitmized (insert ethnic/gender/sexual orientation) hyphenated-American group, the farm subsidies crowd, the crack whore mom welfare future welfare recipient breeders food stamp speical interest, the corporate welfare crowd, the bought a home I can't afford so bail me out crowd, pro-abortion, pro-life, pro-tax cut, anti-cut tax, force everybody into nationalized healthcare, pro-HMO, Envrionmentlaist, lumberjack, AFL-CIO, NEA, AARP, Trial Lawyers Association, MADD, VFW, AMA, ABA, etc etc etc.

For all the complaints about special interests in politics remember that everybody is a special interest. It is like one man's pork being another man's "entitlement" or in the case of Ron Paul and the shrimp industry a "tax credit". Most put their interests ahead of the country and what is right.

I wonder what the outcry would be like if a straight white male super-delegate held out for $20 million to register more straight white-male voters.

/AARP one of the most powerful and most damaging special interests in my opinion. Trial lawyers a close second.

Where do they get these people from? Do they find any old moran on the street just to give them a bigger say in electing the possible leader of the free world?

/Complete our survey and become a superdelegate!

If an ordinary voter can't sell their vote, how can this guy? And his reason is BS. The DNC should be the one sponsoring registration drives, not donations to political candidates. IF either one of the candidates paid him, it would be misuse of campaign funds. What crappy college did he get his lawyer degree at that he doesn't know THIS.

1....2....3...

Counting the posters who read the headline, but not the article....


4...5...

As others have pointed out; how does selling his vote for $20 million differ form those who vote for a candidate who offers them and new or bigger "entitlement" from the tax payer? How many are voting for a candidate because he/she promises a bigger welfare check, to bail them out of ther stupid home buyin decisions, to pay for the raising of their spawn, pay for their healthcare, a subsidy for their business, a bridge to no where or yet another federal project Senator Byrds name on it?

This guy is just more of up front with his disgusting behavior advancing his special interest than the rest of you.

RobertBruce: Wow, that's legal?

Mastervader: I'm pretty sure that's illegal.

Yeah, you wish this was illegal.

This is what I have been chicken-littling about for a while.

Hillary could get a *massive* payoff from, say, China, walk in to the convention and offer every delgate a million a piece for their vote.

And it is 100% legal. (more or less, except maybe the Chinese money part - still)

The delegates, even the pledged delegates, are under no legal requirement to vote as they have sworn to. And payoffs are totally legal as far as Democratic "ethics" are concerned.

Not saying it will happen, just saying it can happen and that there is nothing to stop it.

"No, I think most people right now are looking at this as some crazy guy in California because after all I'm from California," said Ybarra.

They don't think you're crazy because you're from California, they think you're crazy because you are. The whole "massive registration of Mexican-Americans" idea is great, but not so much the auctioning of the vote. I guess it's a good way to get attention, though.

This whole superdelegate thing is super-stupid. They have been spun to be the sage elders, who in times of crisis will come down from on high and bring peace to the masses. That is a load of crap.

The superdelegates system was instituted because the DNC leaders wanted to let non-state-delegates onto the floor of the convention as a perk for their efforts within the party. How did the college student in WI get to be a SD? When an essay contest?

In doing this, the DNC has created a situation whereby it is held hostage by a group of people that have collectively been the 9th caller on the morning radio zoo and their prize is a free trip to Denver.

Christ, did anybody RTFA? He wants an earmark to fund registration and education of a whole demographic of voters.

acanuck: How does a sellout chimp like this get to be a superdelegate?

Are you really asking that?

You realize that superdelegates are officials in the democratic party, and therefore politicians.

My question is more along the lines of "How does a sellout chimp like this decide it's OK to be so obvious about his sell-outness?"

WhotheWhatNow: Christ, did anybody RTFA? He wants an earmark to fund registration and education of a whole demographic of voters.


Yeah? and that is immoral and wrong. How would you feel if he was going to use the money to fund registration of a whole demographic of skinheads? Or maybe if it went to building a fence on the Mexican -U.S. border? You think it's OK because the ends suit you, that is why our political process is screwed up.

A whole demographic of voters that match his ethnicity. Can't anyone just concentrate on what's best for the country as a whole instead of worrying about some specific group?

"No, $5 million is nothing," said Ybarra.

Really? I wasn't aware $5 million was nothing. In that case, why doesn't he give me NOTHING and his super delegate status?

How do really stupid people always seem to be the ones making decisions? This country is starting to remind me of something...

After reading through the thread it is apparent to me that many people do not understand the difference between a primary contest and a general election, direct campaign contributions and legislative earmarks, and the Democratic party and the Federal government.

Munchausen's Proxy: The superdelegates system was instituted because the DNC leaders wanted to let non-state-delegates onto the floor of the convention as a perk for their efforts within the party. How did the college student in WI get to be a SD? When an essay contest?

In doing this, the DNC has created a situation whereby it is held hostage by a group of people that have collectively been the 9th caller on the morning radio zoo and their prize is a free trip to Denver.

The superdelegate system was created because DNC members and members of Congress wanted to get to vote at convention, and the Democratic party didn't want them taking the place of ordinary citizens who could become pledged delegates from primaries.

The Wisconsin college kid, like the majority of DNC members, was elected by the Democratic party of his state four years ago.

That said: "No, I think most people right now are looking at this as some crazy guy in California because after all I'm from California and I'm a crazy guy," said Ybarra.

incredible! entrusted with a powerful vote and he doesnt really care who wins as long as he can get some money for his voting scheme.

Rolander: WhotheWhatNow: Christ, did anybody RTFA? He wants an earmark to fund registration and education of a whole demographic of voters.


Yeah? and that is immoral and wrong. How would you feel if he was going to use the money to fund registration of a whole demographic of skinheads? Or maybe if it went to building a fence on the Mexican -U.S. border? You think it's OK because the ends suit you, that is why our political process is screwed up.

How does the end suit me? I'm a white guy from Ohio, what do I care if Mexican-Americans get registered to vote? how is educating people on the political process and encouraging them to fulfill an obligation of citizenship a bad thing? I don't know if $20,000,000 is a reasonable amount to accomplish the man's goal or not but it isn't like he's "selling" his vote, he's lobbying for a cause. "hey, support my mission and I'll vote for you"...just like every other person in the country. pretty much a non-story, really.

cfish78: incredible! entrusted with a powerful vote and he doesnt really care who wins as long as he can get some money for his voting scheme.

We don't expect Europeans to understand democracy.

Greed and immorality are characteristics exclusive to Republicans. To accuse a Democrat of such proclivities is a hateful and bigoted attack.

Mastervader: I'm pretty sure that's illegal.

Why? It's a party vote, not an election.

/although, the party will probably kick him to the curb.

cfish78: incredible! entrusted with a powerful vote and he doesnt really care who wins as long as he can get some money for his voting scheme.

Ummm....that's pretty much every politician in America right there.

GoldSpider: Greed and immorality are characteristics exclusive to Republicans. To accuse a Democrat of such proclivities is a hateful and bigoted attack.

Read the article, dude. You're supposed to play the "special interests" card on this one.

GoldSpider: Greed and immorality are characteristics exclusive to Republicans. To accuse a Democrat of such proclivities is a hateful and bigoted attack.

There's no persecution complex like conservative persecution complex.

RminusQ: The superdelegate system was created because DNC members and members of Congress wanted to get to vote at convention, and the Democratic party didn't want them taking the place of ordinary citizens who could become pledged delegates from primaries.

The Wisconsin college kid, like the majority of DNC members, was elected by the Democratic party of his state four years ago.

That explains the congressmen, but not the others. Including those from Florida and Michigan there are over 800 super delegates. The DNC created superdelegates to hand out as perks. That is why they have them left over to hand over to college students. Was he a high-school student when awarded a superdelegacy?

/The first rule of super delegate club is don't use super delegates

Paedophile_Deluxe: Read the article, dude. You're supposed to play the "special interests" card on this one.

I'm not really interested in this guy's cause. If I can't legally sell my vote on eBay, why can this douche?

Munchausen's Proxy: The DNC created superdelegates to hand out as perks. That is why they have them left over to hand over to college students.

Superdelegates were created because the move from direct party selection of the candidate to selection by primary/caucus was felt to be a bit dangerous since the party itself lost control of the selection.

From wikipedia

After the 1968 Democratic National Convention, the Democratic Party made changes in its delegate selection process, based on the work of the McGovern-Fraser Commission. The purpose of the changes was to make the composition of the convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast during the campaign for the nomination.

Some Democrats believed that these changes had unduly diminished the role of party leaders and elected officials, weakening the Democratic tickets of George McGovern and Jimmy Carter. In 1982, a commission chaired by former North Carolina Governor Jim Hunt created superdelegates. Under the original Hunt plan, superdelegates were 30% of all delegates, but when it was finally implemented in 1984, they were 14%. The number has steadily increased, and today they are approximately 20%.[6]

In 1984 only state party chair and vice chairs were guaranteed superdelegate status. The remaining spots were divided two ways. The Democrats in Congress were allowed to select up to 60% of their members to fill some of these spots. The remaining positions were left to the state parties to fill with priority given to governors and big-city mayors. In 1988 this process was simplified. Democrats in Congress were now allowed to select up to 80% of their members. All DNC members and all Democratic governors were automatically given superdelegate status. This year also saw the addition of the distinguished party leader category (although former DNC chairs were not added to this category until 1996, and former House and Senate minority leaders were not added until 2000). 1992 saw the addition of a category of unpledged "add-ons", a fixed number of spots allocated to the states, intended for other party leaders and elected officials not already covered by the previous categories. Finally beginning in 1996 all Democratic members of Congress were given automatic superdelegate status.[7]

You can argue that this is an 'undemocratic' method of selecting candidates, and I wouldn't disagree. But it is certainly within the rights of the party to select their candidate however they damn well please.

It may not serve the party's interest to look like they are not responding to the people's will, but there really is no principle of democracy being violated, because no office is awarded in the party elections.

"Yeah, absolutely. People do it all the time," answered Ybarra.

It begs the question. Is he crazy?

O'RLY??? Sounds like a job for the Irony Police!

Is that the question he begs? The sad thing is that Ybarra is guilty of begging the question, so this is one time when a reporter could have actually used the phrase "Begging the question correctly."

1) If there are instances where people do X then I am justified in doing X.

2) There are instances where people do X.

Therefore

3) I am justified in doing X

To be certain Premise 1) presumes its own implicit premise that 'It is true that people doing X justify doing X', so Ybarra's argument is actually guilty of begging the question.

RTFA

Massa Damnata: so Ybarra's argument is actually guilty of begging the question.

You're begging the question, Dracula.