May 22nd, 2008
03:35 PM ET
15 years ago

Blitzer: Could Democrats scrap the current delegate system?

[cnn-photo-caption image= caption="Blitzer: Democrats are already starting to look past 2008."] WASHINGTON (CNN) - The Democratic presidential nominating process is still being played out. It certainly looks like Barack Obama is very close to wrapping it up, but Hillary Clinton is not yet giving up.

There are still three more contests left, on June 1 in Puerto Rico, and on June 3 in Montana and South Dakota. And now, Senator Clinton and her advisers are even leaving open the possibility that this process could drag on to the Democratic convention in Denver at the end of August, especially if there is no change in the party’s refusal to seat the full Michigan and Florida delegations.

Back in early January, just before the first caucuses in Iowa, few would have thought that this process could continue into June. Many pundits actually predicted the Republican nominating process could drag on. But the widely-held assumption then was that the Democrats would wrap it up quickly, probably with Hillary Clinton winning the nomination. All of this goes to show that making political predictions can be a risky business.

Now, Democratic insiders are already starting to look beyond this year. Some are questioning the entire nominating process.

For example, should the party do away with its superdelegates. “I never supported superdelegates to begin with – 25 years ago,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, herself a superdelegate, said today. “I ran for the Chair of the National Committee opposed to superdelegates. You can imagine what a winning platform that was.”

She wants the Democratic Party to reconsider its rules. “There should be some representation of that leadership of the party and the congressional, gubernatorial and other manifestations of the party, but I think 800 is far too many.”

Is it too early for the Democrats to rethink their rules for 2012 based on what has happened this year?

Filed under: Wolf Blitzer
soundoff (267 Responses)
  1. John, London

    We Democrats are getting tired of the whinnings of the Clintons. Why the heck do they think they own the Democratic Party and that everybody will do their bid in the party?

    To hell with I have the majority (popular) vote and hence I should be the nominee. Why the hell does she think we had the primaries? Its all about delegates and super-delegates which she is losing (or had even already lost).

    Point remains that she was the MOST POPULAR of all the candidates (because of the name – Clinton which she carries) before the primaries started but she lost the nomination thaks to her campaign management team. Now coming around to FORCE the DNC to install her as the Republican norminee shall make joke of all the primaries conducted in all the (so called 48 states).

    As someone on this blog said, the Clinton shall complaints of everything unless it favours them at the detriment of the Democratic Party and thats a real SHAME.

    May 22, 2008 06:53 pm at 6:53 pm |
  2. Lance

    Wolf, give it up. You are sounding desperate like Ms. Clinton.

    May 22, 2008 06:53 pm at 6:53 pm |
  3. Dal CA

    Follow the rules! If you mess with the rules you forfeit the race. Hillary you are the one who will forfeit this race.

    May 22, 2008 06:56 pm at 6:56 pm |
  4. Scott Glenn in Wa

    really in a winner take all process the voters get screwed if and or when there candidate is found to be a bad apple .....after winning several states or vice versa....

    May 22, 2008 06:56 pm at 6:56 pm |
  5. Griff

    Well didn't make it, this time around.. I guess I need a New Server...

    May 22, 2008 06:56 pm at 6:56 pm |
  6. Nina B.

    It should be "winner take all', isn't it obviious by this point? Hillary should have been the Democratic nominee many moons ago. This is a travesty.

    May 22, 2008 06:57 pm at 6:57 pm |
  7. Dana in Maryland

    Proportional delegates yes, Super Delegates NO! I also don't like the Winner take all system since it disenfranchises the losing side, and makes States the important unit instead of the individual voter. The Proportional system doesn't disadvantage voters based on the states they live in. A century ago, that might have been important,. but with our Mobile population, What state you live in shouldn't have a bearing on the election.

    May 22, 2008 06:57 pm at 6:57 pm |
  8. Nancy

    If Obama is so much for CHANGE then he should agree this process has to change. He won't. He only wants change that he wants and we shall see about that. CHANGE is only a word and i don't see him doing anything, he hasn't so far, i have not seen him stand up for anything since he has ran.

    This has nothing to do with him or Hillary. I for one and I can see there are many others that think this has to change. This is for the future of the Democratic party.

    May 22, 2008 06:57 pm at 6:57 pm |
  9. Ken

    Yes they should change their rules including eliminating the undemocratic Caucaus .

    May 22, 2008 06:58 pm at 6:58 pm |
  10. Nia

    They hneed to do something an quick before Hillary has more of chance at abusing it it to her advantage.

    May 22, 2008 06:59 pm at 6:59 pm |
  11. Tom,des moines

    I think we should get rid of all superdelegate,caucus and replace with primary and the winner should take all.

    Go Hillary 08!

    May 22, 2008 07:00 pm at 7:00 pm |
  12. Nancy

    Obama supporters don't want this to change because of the caucuses, which from what I have read were a total disaster in every state especially the large states. Nevada gave Obama 1 of the delegates by a cut in a deck of cards. We now give delegates by who gets the larger card. Don't tell me this is not a joke.

    May 22, 2008 07:00 pm at 7:00 pm |
  13. Dan in Sacramento, CA

    Here's how it works and has worked since day one of this primary season, folks.

    When Clinton wins by a small margin, it's "a win is a win."
    When Clinton wins by a large margin, it's "Americans have spoken and this contest is over. Hillary is the winner."

    When Obama wins by a large margin, it's "a win is a win."
    When Obama wins by a small margin, it's "Americans have spoken and the contest is over. Hillary is the winner."

    See? The rules aren't changing, they are just very complicated.

    May 22, 2008 07:01 pm at 7:01 pm |
  14. Jerome Dukes

    There is nothing wrong with the process. The problem here is are the superdeligates and the Clintons. I'm not sure with the superdeligates are waiting for are they in cahoots with the Clintons.

    They should do a servey to see how Obama would do in red states, I'm sure there are more then a few that will change blue. The electoral map swing states they say he needs to win is a bogus measuring stick. He does not need WV, FL, KT to with the elections

    May 22, 2008 07:02 pm at 7:02 pm |
  15. Nancy

    Settle down Obama supporters. We are not talking about doing this change now, we are saying it needs to be done in 2012.

    May 22, 2008 07:02 pm at 7:02 pm |
  16. NO MOB RULE!!!

    Nancy you dolt obama wants change for the better not jsut change for hillary he has stood against the lies and attacks of the clintonistas and remained true to himself she meanwhile whines and pules everytime she doesnt get her wat I guess, since you do not seem to iunderstand that basic fact you are another one of those clintonistas who cry just because the woman has had her butt handed to her "Dont disenfrancise those in FL and MI who broke the rules and voted disenfrancise those in FL and MI who followed the rules

    Ignorance is ugly

    May 22, 2008 07:03 pm at 7:03 pm |
  17. Larry of Boston

    Suggestions for improving the DEM nominating process; putting the decision into the hands of the voters; and getting the hand picking aspect out altogether.

    1. Go to an electoral basis identical to the general election.
    2 Like the general election, use a winner take all for each state's electoral votes
    3. Eliminate all super delegates and their voting power
    4. Make all the elections to be held on the same day like the general election so the media and pundits and polls do not influence the election process

    May 22, 2008 07:05 pm at 7:05 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11