TN Gov. Calls for "Superdelegate Primary" in June

In an op-ed today in the New York Times, Governor Phil Bredesen (D-TN) called for a "superdelegate primary" to be held in June in which all the party's superdelegates would publicly convene and decide the Party's nominee for president.

Here's what Bredesen suggests...

...schedule a superdelegate primary. In early June, after the final primaries, the Democratic National Committee should call together our superdelegates in a public caucus.

Of the 795 superdelegates, over 40 percent have not announced which candidate they are supporting; I’m one of them. While it would be comfortable for me to delay making a decision until the convention, the reality is that I’ll have all the information I reasonably need in June, and so will my colleagues across the country.

There will have been more than 20 debates, and more than 28 million Americans will have made their choices and voted. Any remaining uncertainty in our nominee will then lie with the superdelegates, and it will be time for us to make our choices and get on with the business of electing a president.

This is not a proposal for a mini-convention with all the attendant hoopla and sideshows. It is a call for a tight, two-day business-like gathering, whose rules would be devised by the national committee, of the leaders of our party from all over America to resolve a serious problem. There would be a final opportunity for the candidates to make their arguments to these delegates, and then one transparent vote.

This is our electoral process at work in a way the founders would be proud of.

Bredesen, one of the most popular governors in the country from either party, also mentions "a summer of growing polarization" and "lost opportunities to heal the wounds of the primaries, to fill the party’s coffers, to offer unified Democratic ideas for America’s challenges".

Remember, what Bredesen is talking about is not a way to diminish the delegates collected by the candidates already.  He is suggesting a seperate event for the undecided supers; a way to force the remaining fence-sitters to make a committment.  All the math from the supers and the earned pledged delegates from the state elections and caucuses will be added up and we'll know who the Party's nominee is going to be.

What do you think?

•  What A Waste Of Time And Newsprint

  The rules are, what the rules are, and too many people have FAR, far too much to gain from the coming super-delegate auction.

  by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:44:32 PM PDT

  •  Phil is my Gov and a good one, but...

    this is a stupid idea.  

    by ourhispanicvoices on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:46:11 PM PDT

    •  23 million people have voted in

      Democratic primaries & caucuses to date, and he wants a group of a few hundred to decide it ?

      News flash, Gov Phil :  It's already been decided.  Clinton can't win the nomination without stealing it.  Period.

      by RobertInWisconsin on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:51:47 PM PDT

      •  You misunderstand!

        It's a GREAT idea. What he is saying is that, the superdelegates should get together and decide who gets all their delegates. This will be in June after everyone has voted. Obviously, Obama will be ahead in delegates. A majority of the superdelegates will choose him and voila! We have our nominee!! And we don't have to wait until the convention to start attacking and defining Mccain.

        It's a perfect idea, I think.

        by jenontheshore on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:55:01 PM PDT

        •  They WILL Come Together-In Denver

          ......

          by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:04:36 PM PDT

          •  why are you so against this?

            this seems like a sound idea.  is because you're for Obama?  so am I.  Assumedly, he'd win this, and get to begin to start fighting McCain earlier.  If you're for Hillary, don't you want to be able to try to make your superdelegate push earlier, so that you can start focusing on McCain?

            by DoGooderLawyer on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:38:10 PM PDT

          •  Exactly! n/t

            by ancblu on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:39:39 PM PDT

    •  I disagree

      It's a terrific idea.

      Without a nominee, our hands are tied. Mccain is being attacked by no one, even as we tear each other down. Choosing a nominee in June will allow us to begin the general election and increase our chance of success.

      by jenontheshore on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:52:43 PM PDT

•  I think he's dead on.

  The farther from the convention that the superdelegates can express their preference, the faster we can get on with the campaign and the more likely that the convention can be a jumping off point for a great presidential campaign.

  I never really liked Phil Bredesen, but he's on to something here i think.

  by jkennerl on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:46:23 PM PDT

  •  BUT

    if that was the case, supers would have picked Hillary way back when in the beginning. If we start imposing deadlines for supers, they will may  pushed farther and farther back such that the election is won before it starts. While this year, this baby is virtually over, I'm thinking of the future.

    by nviedprincess on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:51:58 PM PDT

    •  I disagree

      I think most Dems want to get this thing over by the convention, don't you?

      The superdelegate, I have to infer, must agree. It gives Obama a shot to define the election on the right terms before John McCain does.

      by jkennerl on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:55:18 PM PDT

      •  Excuse me, BEFORE the convention. nt

        by jkennerl on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:55:46 PM PDT

      •  Oh no doubt

        I want this over, but I'm saying if we start creating deadlines for the superdelegates, that's one more thing that can be changed in the future, which could present another problem.

        by nviedprincess on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:08:47 PM PDT

•  Is the governor reading my comments?

  I know he doesn't, but I suggested the same thing here several days ago.

  Needless to say, I think it is a good idea and the only way to stop the infighting in time to concentrate on winning in November.

  by Endangered Alaskan Dem on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:49:26 PM PDT

  •  Let's try that link again.

    It might be here or I really need to learn this linky thing better.

    by Endangered Alaskan Dem on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:52:02 PM PDT

•  Keep the rules!

  As soon as we violate the rules everything else will get screwed up.  Ket's stick to the rules people.

  by Char on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:50:56 PM PDT

•  Brilliant

  OH PLEASE DO IT!

  Seriously, it's the best idea that I've ever heard. We would have our nominee, finally, and Obama can start fighting back against Mccain.

  by jenontheshore on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:51:04 PM PDT

•  The party conventions were originally formed

  as an event where delegates vote to nominate candidates for President and Vice President.  In recent cycles the conventions have evolved into four-day infomercials for the candidates, who have already clinched their nominations.

  Because there's a close race this year, Gov. Bredesen is suggesting a convention before the convention, to restore the convention to it's current status as ceremonial only.

  Just found out recently that on the NBC game show The Biggest Loser, the scale they use on TV is fake.  Contestants are pre-weighed offstage before taping.  The televised weigh-ins are staged spectacles; the results of the non-televised weigh-ins are revealed.  Hope our convention doesn't turn into The Biggest Loser ;-)

  by Greasy Grant on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:56:40 PM PDT

•  Being From TN

  Bredesen has been a great Governor. He (of course) cleaned up the mess of the republican Gov. Sundquist.. a nightmare. His reasoned analysis is right on. the Clintons do not care if they blow our party apart but everyone else does.

  We need to be running against McSame ASAP.

  God, will Hillary just STFU?

  by gimmie truth on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:06:29 PM PDT

•  The cynic in me...

  thinks that this is just so the "supers" know a bit earlier exactly what job they will have in 01/09 once the back room deals and "negotiations" are done.  I mean there may be need to relocate, re-furnish and the inevitable wardrobe upgrades.  

  by lzyltnin on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:16:30 PM PDT

•  the problem the dems face

  was outlined in a post on Huffpo last week - the DNC has to prepare its national campaign.  A delay of a month or two months in preparing this national campaign could cripple the ground organizations of the nominee in setting up campaign centers and local planning.  McCain is doing his national campaign planning and setup NOW.  If no nominee is selected until August, that shortens the national campaign season two a mere two month period, where McCain has the entire spring and summer.

  So it is not so much an issue of pushing superdelegates as it is to get into the next phase of the campaign with a legitimately selected nominee.  To this end, the plan is a sound one and may avert catastrophe in running against a very well prepared opponent on the Repub side.

  by louisev on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:16:32 PM PDT

•  i like the idea (n/t)

  by DoGooderLawyer on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:35:31 PM PDT

•  Rachel Maddow mentioned this tonight as

  a way to end this candidate war. I'll have to think on this more, but we need this ended soon.

  by valadon on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:13:32 PM PDT