Former Democratic Vice Presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro has some advice for Democratic voters worried about superdelegates swaying the election in favor of Hillary Clinton. Suck it up, we know better than you and that is why we are here!
Of course she didn't use those exact words, but that is the general premise behind her op-ed in the NY Times today titled "Got a Problem? Ask the Super" Her endorsement of the superdelegates can be summed up in less than one paragraph "But the superdelegates were created to lead, not to follow. They were, and are, expected to determine what is best for our party and best for the country. "
Of course when she uses the term "our party", what she is actually referring to are those who are in power, not those who put them there. Although our country was founded under the premise "of the people, by the people, and for the people", Mrs. Ferraro is acknowledging that in the Democratic party, some people are held in higher regard than others. This is how the Democrats attempted to "unify the party" as she put it. Somehow I doubt we will see much unification if Obama were to win the majority of delegates through primaries and caucuses only to have the superdelegates hand the nomination to Clinton. Likewise, we will see much infighting if the party were to accept Mrs. Ferraro's other recommendation.
"But if they are actually upset over the diminished clout of rank-and-file Democrats in the presidential nominating process, then I would love to see them agitating to force the party to seat the delegates elected by the voters in Florida and Michigan. In those two states, the votes of thousands of rank-and-file party members will not be counted because their states voted on dates earlier than those authorized by the national party.
Because both states went strongly for Mrs. Clinton, standing up for the voices of grassroots Democrats in Florida and Michigan would prove the integrity of the superdelegate-bashers. The people of those states surely don't deserve to be disenfranchised simply because the leaders of their state parties brought them to the polls on a day that had not been endorsed by the leaders of our national party — a slight the voters might not easily forget in November."
I find this ironic that in the same op-ed Mrs. Ferraro claims the superdelegates, as party leaders, know what is best for their party, while at the same time highlighting the failures of the party leaders in both Florida and Michigan. Like Hillary Clinton, Mrs. Ferraro believes that those delegates should be seated even though voters in those two States were effectively told not to bother voting because their vote would not be counted.
She argues against the disenfranchised voters in those two States, yet in Michigan, Hillary Clinton was the only viable candidate on the ballot and was only able to manage 55% of the vote, with 40% voting uncommitted. I would hardly consider this "grass roots supports" as Mrs. Ferraro does.