Many Democrats, particularly Bernie Sanders supporters, were upset with the primary process in 2016. They were specifically unhappy with the delegates called "superdelegates", who are not bound to vote for the candidates who won their states. The superdelegates, according to some, disproportionately favored Hillary Clinton and effectively shut Bernie Sanders out of the nomination. Whether that is true is up for debate (and a topic for another post); regardless, the DNC made changes to the superdelegate voting rules after 2016 that will decrease their perceived importance both during the primaries and at the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee in July. Here's how it works, in a nutshell.
Superdelegates are appointed based on their positions in the Democratic party, and may cast their votes at the convention for whomever they please. They include elected members of the DNC, governors, congresspeople, and distinguished party leaders such as former Presidents and Vice Presidents. In 2020, they will make up about 16% of the total number of delegates. The remaining 84% of the Democratic delegates are pledged delegates, meaning they are required to vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged. Pledged delegates are chosen because of the candidate they support, and are chosen in approximate ratio to their candidate's share of the vote in each state. Only the votes of pledged delegates are included in the total awarded to candidates after each state's primary. Should a candidate drop out of the race, his or her pledged delegates are free to support any of the remaining candidates, but often will pledge to whichever candidate their original candidate chooses to endorse. This likely means that a delegate for a moderate (or progressive) candidate who drops out will wind up casting a vote for another moderate (or progressive) candidate still in the race.
In 2016, many of the superdelegates announced their preferred candidate during their states' primaries - even though their preferences weren't yet being counted - and their preference skewed heavily towards Hillary Clinton (which shouldn't be surprising, since Democratic officials are likely to support a permanent Democrat). Several mainstream media outlets included these announced preferences in the candidate delegate totals during the primary elections, even though they had not actually voted yet, and even though the DNC asked the media to NOT count them in the running totals. This artificially inflated Clinton's delegate count by over 500 delegates, and raised the hackles of Sanders supporters, who began to think that the primaries were "rigged" against him. As I said above, that is a topic for another post, and I'm not about to digress.
As a result of this perceived unfairness of the 2016 superdelegate count, the DNC has changed its delegate rules for 2020. Under the new rules, superdelegates cannot vote on the first ballot at the convention, unless one candidate already clearly has enough votes (a majority of pledged delegates) to win the nomination. If no single candidate has a majority of pledged votes following the first ballot, the superdelegates join in the second ballot, and the pledged delegates become free to vote for any candidate. This is known as a "contested convention". The big question then becomes: are the newly released delegates more likely to vote for the candidate with the plurality of votes - with the goal of giving that candidate a majority - or for the candidate whose views most closely align with the candidate to whom they were originally pledged (assuming they are not the same person)? There are arguments to be made for both options, and the delegates are given full rein to use their best judgement, subject to the horse-wrangling that would undoubtedly take place on the convention floor. It's too early to start analyzing how a contested convention might play out, but given that as of today there are still six viable candidates, it's food for thought. Or food for Facebook arguments. Until next time...
Posted by: |