Democratic National Committee marks Clinton for the win, Sanders supporters outraged

Written by David Roman

It’s strange to think that a committee named for the Democratic processes that entitles every citizen to have a vote, a voice for how things are decided is so keen on doing the exact opposite to its members.

But that’s exactly what the Democratic National Committee, or the formal governing body for the United States’ Democratic Party is doing.

Being an out and proud liberal democrat, I admit being critical of the D.N.C. feels off, as if I’m criticizing my abuela’s tortillas or calling a professor an idiot to their face, but I wouldn’t be doing my civic duty to my country or my party if I kept quite.

The 2016 presidential campaign is set to be one of the most important political races seen in the country for some time. With the country fully recovered from the recession and the economy only getting stronger, whoever ends up in the Oval Office on Jan. 20, 2017 will undoubtedly be signing off (or not signing off) on pieces of legislation that determine the direction the U.S. takes in a rapidly evolving world.

Legislation from anywhere between foreign problems like security in the middle east, trade with Asia or domestic social issues such as attacks on planned parenthood or the future of governmental assistance programs.

Perhaps it is this election’s underscored importance why the party committees have been holding the elections with a vice-grip. Characterized in the Grand Old Party by strong views on Donald Trump, those RNC members supporting him generally only are to back a winner and those against him fighting tooth and nail to keep him out of power.

But these controlling attitudes are also being displayed within the DNC and democrats are not pleased.

At the time of writing the two contenders for the democratic party’s vote are neck-and-neck in pledged delegates with Hillary Clinton leading with 1,280 and Bernie Sanders closely behind with 1,061.

If anyone is looking at this race it’d be impossible to tell who’ll reach the revered 2,383 delegates needed to win the majority vote.

It’s when someone takes into account superdelegates that things become far more skewed. Superdelegates are unique to the democratic party and include all democratic members of the house and senate, all sitting democratic governors and the sketchiest of all, distinguished party leaders.

Essentially super delegates can vote for whichever candidate they want, and if they so please they can change their vote. Superdelegates are a way to let the country’s most important (rich and influential) democrats have an even more important and influential voice in who the party chooses to represent them in the presidential race.

While some think it’s only natural to let the acting politicians in the party have a bigger voice in political matters than the average democrat, the whole process is undemocratic by nature not to mention the superdelegate vote is disproportionately more valuable than an average vote.

There are 712 superdelegates this year out of the total 4,051 delegates available. Which means the remaining 3,339 delegates are meant to represent the millions of democrats within the U.S. while each of the 712 V.I.P’s of the party get a voice that is much louder than the average voter.

While some are in support of this, it’s when we see the superdelegates all voting together for one candidate inspite of the popular choice of the state they represent.

Like is the case this year. Even though Clinton is only 250 pledged delegates ahead of Sanders, she currently holds 469 superdelegates compared to Sanders’ meager 31. Yes, you read that right. 31.

If all of this feels like the D.N.C. is ganging up together to elect a candidate despite of public opinion, that’s because they are.

Sure these superdelegates are under any obligation to vote any way but doesn’t it seem natural for party representatives vote in the same direction as the district which elected them into power in the first place?

I don’t hold malice for the insanely rich, big business supporting and panderous (see ‘Clinton is not my abuela’) Hilary. In truth I’d rather see her in office than Trump. But as a democrat she should not suffocate the voice of her party.

Furthermore, the D.N.C. Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz is only making it easier for Clinton to silence the people they represent, with her being quoted as saying, “unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists.”

If all of this feels too undemocratic, then rest assured. If you, like nearly half the democratic party are ‘feeling the Bern’ then call your local chosen superdelegates and ask them to vote for Sanders. And if you don’t know who your local superdelegate is, we’ve provided a handy list of all the California superdelegates, courtesy of Wikipedia, organized by Viewpoints. 

They don’t have to listen to you, at least not under the D.N.C. Charter, but maybe with enough calls we can annoy them into properly representing their constituents.