Nancy Pelosi does not support the use of superdelegates

[Ill Lou Malnati]

Nancy Pelosi Just Dropped Presidential Campaign Bombshell, Comes Out Against Superdelegates

MARCH 3, 2016
NANCY PELOSI JUST DROPPED PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN BOMBSHELL, COMES OUT AGAINST SUPERDELEGATES

DIANA PRICE

Political pundits have been analyzing polls and fretting over voter turnouts in the primaries to try to determine just who will win the Democratic presidential nomination. Or at least some have, even though a significant number simply crowned Hillary Clinton the nominee from the beginning. But regardless of which nominee you’re supporting, something happened today that speaks volumes about which way the tide is turning in the Democratic primary.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D – CA.) has just dropped the biggest bombshell of the campaign, and you may not even have heard about it. Mark my words, when we look back, we’ll see that this was the turning point. The Hill reported today that Pelosi came out against the superdelegate system which is currently of great benefit to Hillary Clinton.

“I’m not a believer in the sway of superdelegates deciding who is going to be the nominee. I think we have a democratic process where people vote on both sides of the aisle … and that that should determine who the nominee is.”

Now, you may be saying, “Hey, that’s not that big of a deal,” but stop for a moment and think about this. No matter how you feel about Pelosi, good or bad, there is no denying that she is one of the best political players on the planet. And she just made a statement that is not Clinton-friendly. That’s a very dangerous thing to do. Just ask Nina Turner or Tulsi Gabbard.

Someone asked on Facebook if Pelosi was really against superdelegates or simply doesn’t like Clinton. And I say this: Nancy likes Nancy, and she’s always going look out for Nancy’s best interests. Bet on it.
So when you apply that principle to what Pelosi said today, you can bet there’s something Nancy Pelosi knows that the rest of us don’t yet. My bet? My bet is it’s no coincidence that Pelosi makes the statement right when there is an announcement that Hillary Clinton’s former emails staffer has been given immunity from prosecution by the U.S. Justice Department in exchange for his cooperation and that he’s accepted it.

Let’s be clear on this. While the email scandal has been going on for a long time (and even I was in line with Bernie Sanders’ feelings about “enough of the damn emails”) this is a game changer. It’s highly unlikely that the Justice Department is going to offer immunity — and even less likely that the staffer would accept it — if there wasn’t something there. Something very important and very damaging, it would seem, when we’ve gotten to this level of an investigation.

The Clintons are a political force you don’t play games with, and Pelosi knows this as well as anyone. Just a little over month ago, she was cuddling up to Hillary Clinton when she denounced Bernie Sanders’ single-payer health plan (which she used to advocate for) and heaped glowing praise on her political sister, according to Politico.

“That Hillary Clinton happens to be a woman is a wonderful thing. But I, yes, have confidence that she will be one of the most qualified people to go into the Oval Office in a long time.”

Now Pelosi — who insists she hasn’t officially endorsed anyone yet — has suddenly gone off the reservation in the Clinton camp and is advocating for changes in the Democratic primary system that would hurt Hillary Clinton’s chances of getting the nomination.

If you listen carefully, you’ll hear the whisper of a butterfly waving its wings in China, and the thundering crash of the House of Clinton collapsing. Seriously.

Something big is about to happen in the Clinton campaign, and given how Pelosi is already starting to cover her backside and distance herself, you can bet it’s not going to be good news for Hill and Bill.

And while we’re on the subject of superdelegates, those superdelegate votes — even those who say they are leaning towards Clinton — are still up for grabs until the convention. The media is being completely disingenuous on this point by counting superdelegates in the totals so far in the Democratic primary.

Note that most of these media outlets are owned by big businesses who have a vested interest in keeping a corporate-friendly president in office and have come out and endorsed or financially supported Hillary Clinton. This is a blatant attempt to discourage Bernie supporters and make them think that the gap between Hillary and Bernie is insurmountable.

Well, guess again.

The real count, as it stands today, without superdelegates, is 577 delegates for Hillary Clinton and 394 delegates for Bernie Sanders, according to Vox. That’s with 35 states to go, and some of Hillary’s biggest southern states are out of the way. There is a long history of superdelegates changing to the other side when the people vote for a different candidate. Just ask Barack Obama.

So no, those votes aren’t cast and those superdelegates can change their mind at any time. Pay attention, corporate media: you aren’t fooling us. And as Bernie Sanders has said many times, he’s in it for the long haul and he’s not dropping out. Your desperation is showing, and Nancy Pelosi has just confirmed this race ain’t over yet.

In fact, I’d guess it’s about to get real. And someone besides the Sanders camp is about to feel the Bern.

 

[Jello Biafra]

From 2008:


Pelosi Wants Superdelegats to Decide Quickly

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is urging the presidential superdelegates to make their picks as soon as possible.

She also had some good news for Sen. Barack Obama.

Pelosi believes the superdelegates should vote for the presidential candidate who has done the best in the presidential primaries and caucuses.

Obama is ahead in both the popular vote and number of elected delegates.

Pelosi told reporters that if the superdelegates override the will of the voters, there will be a voter backlash in the November general election.

Pelosi was in Denver Monday for a walk through of the Pepsi Center with Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.

Pelosi Wants Superdelegates To Decide Quickly

Pelosi: Party Should Heed the Will of the Voters

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says this about the Democratic Party’s campaign for president: “I think the tone could be improved.’’

It’s not so much the candidates, she suggested, as the surrogates.

“I think their people are going at each other, and I think that that's wearing out. I don't think people are interested in that,’’ Pelosi said on ABC This Week with George Stephanopoulos. “But I do think that before we go to the convention, we will have a nominee. We'll go into that convention unified, we'll come out of that convention unified, and we'll be ready to win.’’

And, the speaker said again in an interview Friday that was aired today, the decisions of the party’s “super-delegates’’ to the Democratic National Convention should “reflect’’ which candidate has claimed the most pledged delegates in a contest which she believes will end well before the convention in Denver.

She also reiterated her view that the party may have a “dream team’’ in November, but it will not include both Obama and Clinton on the same ticket.

“I'm just absolutely sure. I just know it. I just know it,’’’ she said. “I’ve been in politics a long time… and I've studied it very carefully, and I think that each one of them will make a great top of the ticket. And we will have a dream ticket, and it will contain one of them. ‘’

In the delegate chase which Obama is leading, the party’s super-delegates are best-advised to follow the will of the party’s voters, said Pelosi, a California Democrat.

“If the votes of the super-delegates overturn what happened in the elections, it would be harmful to the Democratic Party,’’ she said. “This is going to be over before we go to the convention… Pretty soon somebody will be far enough in front that this will come to an end.

What if one candidate has won the popular vote and the other claims the most delegates?

“It's a delegate race. In other words, one wins the Electoral College and one wins the popular vote -- guess who's president of the United States. The way the system works is that the delegates choose the nominee. Most likely the scenario described will not happen.’’

 

[Scoop]

It's voter suppresion, exactly what the D's always accuse the R's of doing. Only difference is here it's to the Democratic Party's advantage so they do it. The Democratic Party has no issue with voter suppresion in of itself though, only when it disadvantages them.

R's do it before ballots are cast, D's do it after ballots are cast.

 

[Jello Biafra]

It's voter suppresion, exactly what the D's always accuse the R's of doing. Only difference is here it's to the Democratic Party's advantage so they do it. The Democratic Party has no issue with voter suppresion.

R's do it before ballots are cast, D's do it after ballots are cast.

But there has never been a Democratic Primary decided by Superdelegates.
Whoever wins the pledged delegate counts in the actual primary/caucus contests has always been the Dem nominee.
This paranoia that somehow the Democratic Party is going to go against the will of the people and select a candidate who hasn't won the primary through actual votes by citizens is crazy especially since the person who has the clearer path to win this thing even without the Superdelegates involvement is Hillary Clinton.

 

[Scoop]

But there has never been a Democratic Primary decided by Superdelegates.
Whoever wins the pledged delegate counts in the actual primary/caucus contests has always been the Dem nominee.
This paranoia that somehow the Democratic Party is going to go against the will of the people and select a candidate who hasn't won the primary through actual votes by citizens is crazy especially since the person who has the clearer path to win this thing even without the Superdelegates involvement is Hillary Clinton.

Breh what I just described was the stated reason why superdelegates were stregthened on the D side.

Go read the wiki page for the 1972 D convention.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

A superdelegate is no different from a "regular" delegate...so if your problem is delegates, just say so.

 

[Jello Biafra]

Breh what I just described was the stated reason why superdelegates were stregthened on the D side.

Go read the wiki page for the 1972 D convention.

I know why Superdelegates were created and what purpose they are ostensibly to be used for but that doesn't change the fact that the Superdelegates have never snatched victory away from a candidate who legitimately won the pledged delegate count in the Democratic Primary.

 

[Scoop]

I know why Superdelegates were created and what purpose they are ostensibly to be used for but that doesn't change the fact that the Superdelegates have never snatched victory away from a candidate who legitimately won the pledged delegate count in the Democratic Primary.

Yeah but they could if it was close enough.

So you know their stated purpose and are still trying to justify it?

 

[Scoop]

A superdelegate is no different from a "regular" delegate...so if your problem is delegates, just say so.

No that's not true

 

[the cac mamba]

in the words of the GOAT george carlin, americans only have the illusion of choice

 

[CACtain Planet]

A superdelegate is no different from a "regular" delegate...so if your problem is delegates, just say so.

 

[Jello Biafra]

Yeah but they could if it was close enough.

I doubt this race will be anywhere near as close as 2008 and they didn't use their "power" then.

 

[the cac mamba]

A superdelegate is no different from a "regular" delegate...so if your problem is delegates, just say so.

delegates have to vote with the results, superdelegates dont

 

[MrSinnister]

It's voter suppresion, exactly what the D's always accuse the R's of doing. Only difference is here it's to the Democratic Party's advantage so they do it. The Democratic Party has no issue with voter suppresion in of itself though, only when it disadvantages them.

R's do it before ballots are cast, D's do it after ballots are cast.

Democrats have no problem with overt corruption, as the rank n file don't give a shyt about news that doesn't suit their confirmation bias that GOP is bad and racist/sexist of Obama and women (which is also true). The corruption is thick as hell, and the only reason Debbie Wasserman Shultz is getting away with her fukkery, is because Obama put a cover over a lot of their shyt, and we're now satisfied.

They were hot as fukk when they were going to do the same to Obama in 2008 and Pelosi stepped in, with others, but only after Obama was truly proven to be the delegate leader. Keep playing with these folks brehs.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

No that's not true

OK...so prove me wrong.

Do you know what a "super-delegate" is?