Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: A Contested Democratic Convention Is Now a Near Statistical Certainty [View all]apcalc
(4,518 posts)127. Well then
It must be true.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
152 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A Contested Democratic Convention Is Now a Near Statistical Certainty [View all]
imagine2015
Apr 2016
OP
If this happens we will see just how crooked the system is here in the U.S.
monicaangela
Apr 2016
#1
Oh FFS, if Sanders wins the nomination, he is electable. He is as electable as Clinton if not more.
Fast Walker 52
Apr 2016
#125
there are plenty of reasons that the Dems would be insane to nominate Clinton
Fast Walker 52
Apr 2016
#139
There will be no contested convention. The SDs will side with the pledged delegate leader after DC.
LonePirate
Apr 2016
#5
so you're saying that the superdelegates should also be counted proportionately?
4ricksren
Apr 2016
#21
then why did hillary have hundreds of superdelegates before even one primary vote was cast?
4ricksren
Apr 2016
#39
Someone posted an article here that Bill Clinton had strong-armed superdelegates
Samantha
Apr 2016
#63
I thought it was amazing that so many super-delegates had committed to Hillary before the first vote
Samantha
Apr 2016
#148
Well, I read the list of super-delegates and I was surprised to see lobbyists on that list
Samantha
Apr 2016
#152
The outcome is the same with or without SDs. They do not control the outcome.
LonePirate
Apr 2016
#80
There has never been an instance where the super delegates overruled the primary process
mythology
Apr 2016
#87
Yes. Whichever candidate wins the majority of pledged delegates will be the nominee.
LonePirate
Apr 2016
#93
My vote for Bernie last month proves otherwise. I simply haven't swallowed the kool-aid like others.
LonePirate
Apr 2016
#94
Side with a candidate that keeps losing primaries and is under threat of indictment?
Califonz
Apr 2016
#103
So you would prefer the SDs back the candidate who does not win the majority of pledged delegates?
LonePirate
Apr 2016
#115
Black voters will also remember that it was Hillary who tried to stop Obama from being nominated.
imagine2015
Apr 2016
#17
Nope, the whole argument rest on what's right and what's fair not some made up bullshit from the op
uponit7771
Apr 2016
#60
Those were the most fun to read about regarding history, because of the many unpredictable
Dragonfli
Apr 2016
#16
Off topic, but earlier today, you were mentioned favorably and quoted today on the
Dragonfli
Apr 2016
#52
Perhaps he will, I bet if you called him on air, his producers would put you right through! /nt
Dragonfli
Apr 2016
#57
I get that, I know that if I called he wouldn't take my call, I am far less unbiased as you
Dragonfli
Apr 2016
#66
Hillary super delegate explains why she flipped to Obama at 2008 convention
imagine2015
Apr 2016
#10
Left out of the Clinton case was that "Goldman-Sachs really wants H. Clinton" nm
rhett o rick
Apr 2016
#12
The people say NO and it will be the party that is out if they continue going against the people,
Zira
Apr 2016
#98
Hillary Clinton, the former Senator from Wall Street. Just what we need. LOL
imagine2015
Apr 2016
#18
He's got a long history of writing loony pro-Bernie articles that do silly things with numbers.
DanTex
Apr 2016
#113
the outsider who tried to hijack a party after 73 yrs of ignoring it will go back to the senate nt
msongs
Apr 2016
#43
The super power origin stories will be most interesting and will involve radioactive money!
Dragonfli
Apr 2016
#56
i believe the superdelegates vote on the first ballot with the pledged delegates, thus
4ricksren
Apr 2016
#25
You're entitled to your own opinions, you aren't entitled to your own facts.
shadowandblossom
Apr 2016
#24
A professor of English? That's always who I go to first for my political news... nt
anotherproletariat
Apr 2016
#34
you can't have it both ways: the PURPOSE of superdelegates was to override the will of the voters
4ricksren
Apr 2016
#41
A major purpose of the super delegates is to protect their own asses by supported whichever ....
imagine2015
Apr 2016
#50
Well, no, the purpose was to prevent a plurality candidate from getting the nomination
Recursion
Apr 2016
#89
Clearly the majority of Democrats want Hillary as their Democratic candidate.
LuvLoogie
Apr 2016
#96
The two party system is a result of our constitutional process of passing legislation
LuvLoogie
Apr 2016
#102
it's only to override the will of the voters if the voters do something stupid
Fast Walker 52
Apr 2016
#114
Super delegates who promised to vote for her will unless they change their minds and vote for Bernie
imagine2015
Apr 2016
#88
If she wins the popular vote and delegate count (even if not a clinch) then I want the supers...
Bread and Circus
Apr 2016
#77
If just 40% of Sanders' supporters vote for Hillary in the GE she can win it without the rest.
Jitter65
Apr 2016
#118
It is foolish to believe that most of the remaining superdelegates will not fall in line and support
Freddie Stubbs
Apr 2016
#123
uh no... he would ONLY do that if he ends up with more real votes in the primary
Fast Walker 52
Apr 2016
#126