Ickes And "Automatic Delegates"

Reader MdV writes:

I just had a proposal to share. Harold Ickes made a big deal of renaming superdelegates to be "automatic delegates" (not that I'm sure I ever fully understood why that name would be better). Wouldn't it be useful for the Obama campaign to start calling pledged delegates "voter-selected delegates" instead? Sounds populist and upbeat to me.

Mr. Ickes was working on delegates even before he met Bill Clinton, and he tells me he's been calling them "automatic delegates" ever since they were invented as a category as a result of the Hunt Commission in 1982.

The term "super delegates" is commonly attributed to commission member Susan Estrich, who, in a meeting, disparagingly called them "so-called "super delegates," and it stuck. Ickes, always a stickler, says he has used the terms interchangibly since then.

Obama supporters don't like it when Ickes uses the term, so, courtesy of an Obama supporter, why not reclaim another early term for pledged delegates: call them "earned delegates."

Comments

Reader MdV writes

Marc, if we've told you once, we've told you a hundred times: that's not how you spell the Russian president-elect's name.

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 10, 2008 12:32 PM

Very important:
What ickes calls delegates

Not important:
Obama Adviser: I ‘Strongly’ Believe Telecoms ‘Should Be Granted Immunity’

One of Obama’s advisers on intelligence and foreign policy advisers, however, is someone who “strongly” supports telecomm immunity. John Brennan is a former CIA official and the current chairman of the Intelligence and National Security Alliance. In a new National Journal interview, Brennan makes it clear that he agrees with the Bush administration on the issue of immunity...
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/07/obama-brennan

Count on the "liberal media" to focus on what's important. The last thing thay'd want to happen is to have somebody grill obama on his advisors.

Posted by hadenough | March 10, 2008 12:33 PM

I think Obama's supporters should embrace the term automatic delegates. First, they're obviously not automatic - evidenced by the fact that quite a few of them seem to be changing their minds from Clinton to Obama.

Second of all, Obama will soon have more "automatic" delegates, at which point the Clinton camp will chastise their influence and claim that they don't matter, much like the voters of red states, small states, caucus states, and Illinois.

Posted by Craig | March 10, 2008 12:34 PM

I suggest we start referring to them as "potted plant delegates" just to see what the lines on Ickes' forehead do.

Posted by Deborah | March 10, 2008 12:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think Fred Agbot once even tried to rename them "party faithful delegates." For reasons I cannot comprehend, that effort failed utterly.

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 10, 2008 12:45 PM

hadenough: Seriously? As the very first sentence of that article points out: "Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has consistently spoken out and voted against granting retroactive immunity for telecoms that participated with the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program."

Posted by Brendan | March 10, 2008 12:50 PM

call pledged delegates exactly what they are: "elected delegates."

Posted by along | March 10, 2008 1:05 PM

THE TAX RECORDS... WHAT ABOUT THE TAX RECORDS!

The coming tax return fights

Jake Tapper notes something I hadn't realized: While calling for Clinton's past tax returns, Obama has only released his own from last year -- 2006. A spokesman wouldn't tell me, or Tapper, why he wouldn't release earlier ones.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/The_coming_tax_return_fights.html

Feel like a rube yet?

Of course tax records won't tell us damn thing about how much money rezko funneled to obama. tax records released by candidates alone are pretty much menaingless. Senators are required by law to release yearly records showing where their income comes from. Something Hillary has done for the past 7 years. It wasn't about wanting to sniff Hillary's panties it was about obama and the "liberal media" pushing yet another smear against Hillary. obama's tax attack was a sick joke pushed by his karl rove style dirty tracks shop and pumped up by the "liberal media." Kinda odd that now the "liberal media" pretends they didn't know that.

Posted by hadneough | March 10, 2008 1:11 PM

And then we can call superdelegates "unelected delegates". Works for me.

Posted by Ron | March 10, 2008 1:11 PM

Hadenough this story has been debunked. Tapper is a lazy journalist. He released his taxes from 2002.

Please see the Chicago Tribune article.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0704250022apr25,1,3690658.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

Last year Tapper vs Tapper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJdixCXr5lU

Chicago Sun Times
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/72374,CST-NWS-
obama26.article

All Tapper had to do was go to the Sun Times or Tribune..

Posted by Ann | March 10, 2008 1:19 PM

hadenough, maybe Jake should have asked the Chicago papers for a copy:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/72374,CST-NWS-obama26.article

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 10, 2008 1:20 PM

Obama live in Mississippi..
http://www.cnn.com/video/live/live.html?stream=stream3

Posted by Ann | March 10, 2008 1:26 PM

"Hadenough this story has been debunked. Tapper is a lazy journalist. He released his taxes from 2002.

Posted by Ann"

Yes of course it has been debunked but not really. obama has always released his tax returns but where are they? Can't find'em on google. Could they be with his state senate records? After all it's very important that we look through candidates tax records.

If you have links to more than his 2006 return please provide. Also if you need to sniff Hillary's panties for the last 7 years as required by law she has released more info about where her income comes from than you will get off the top sheets of a tax return.

Posted by hadenough | March 10, 2008 1:39 PM

Read the article please.. He already has. Thanks

Posted by Ann | March 10, 2008 1:43 PM

How about "elected delegates"?

Posted by EarBucket | March 10, 2008 2:25 PM

Enforcers cannot steal the election

Who is Harold Ickes and why is he saying that delegates won by Barrack Obama are irrelevant?
Ickes is a chief supporter of the Clinton campaign and a member of the Democratic National Committee. Ickes has announced that the automatic delegates will choose Hillary before it goes to the floor of the convention because they know who can get elected.
Hold up there a minute Icky. First of all, automatic delegates is a spin term for Superdelegates. There are not automatic delegates, unless he knows something we don't.
Second, Superdelegates are not superior delegates. They don't get to throw the baby out with the bathwater if their candidate isn't the peoples' choice.
Ickes and his cronies are being compared with the Pendergasts of the '30s. Pendergasts? Before my time, so I looked them up on the Internet. Seems as though this bunch of politicians and gangsters in Kansas City formed a beneficial co-op to discredit, intimidate and even murder their opponents. Those who dared stand up were literally gunned down.
Are we willing to let Pendergast-like enforcers steal our votes and tell us who the inevitable candidate is?
In order for the democratic process to work, it can't be turned over to hands dipped in the honey pot of special interest. We must make sure the hands of all Superdelegates are clean. We the people put Ick-the-Slick and crew on notice. We will not tolerate grasp-roots politics.

Posted by Mary Mc | March 10, 2008 2:39 PM

Here's a radical suggestion - Why not refer to them by their official name: Party leaders and elected officials (PLEOs).

Posted by Tim K | March 10, 2008 2:42 PM