Why All the Posts About Superdelegates???

[Garrett78]

Clinton will likely end up with around 2200 pledged delegates (give or take 100) and Sanders will likely end up with around 1800 pledged delegates (give or take 100). With 2026 constituting a majority. Sure, it could possibly end up being closer than that, but I don't get why there is so much talk about superdelegates at this time.

If it does end up 2200-1850, is there really anyone here who thinks the person with 2200 should not be the nominee? Is there anyone here who thinks the superdelegates should make the 1850 person the nominee?

[Stallion]

1. No-50% of the Pledged Delagates Will Not Win the Nomination

and that's why Super Delegates are most definitely relevant-you need 50% of Pledged plus perhaps several hundred Super Delagates

[Stallion]

2. 2,383 delegates needed to win-not 2026

nm

[Garrett78]

4. 2026 constitutes a majority of pledged delegates.

2383 is including superdelegates. If one candidate far surpasses 2026 pledged delegates, does anyone really think that person should not be the nominee? That's what I'm asking.

To me, 2200-1850 means it's a done deal. At that point, the superdelegate allocation is a mere formality.

[Stallion]

5. Yes I think there are Scenarios Where that Candidate WILL NOT be Nominated

the most likely scenario involves the several hundred Super Delegates who are Officeholders or running for Office who do not want to run with a Democratic Socialist at the Top of the Democratic ticket. Many will not change their mind because they don't want to be bombarded in their District and States by the coming Heat Wave of attacks tying anybody supporting Sanders with the Red Menace.

[VulgarPoet]

7. The Cold War blinders are strong with these people.

[Garrett78]

8. Sanders isn't going to be the one far surpassing 2026, but...

...if he is, I wouldn't want the superdelegates overturning the will of the people in that case either.

[postatomic]

3. It's the talk for the week. Last week I think it was a fucking bird or something.

I wish there was a calendar so the rest of us could keep track. I am soooooo anxious to see what next week holds.

[Orsino]

6. Superdelegates are individuals, however Establishment they might tend to be.

Until those pledged totals you estimate become hard numbers, it's not easy to say which superdelegates might jump which way.

But since they're likely to break along with pledged totals, why is this yet another thread about superdelegates?

[Garrett78]

9. Why another thread about superdelegates?

I considered that, but I went ahead and started this thread in an effort to maybe stem the tide, so to speak. Probably foolish to think I can, though.

Anyway, given that Clinton will more than likely far surpass 2026, I don't think superdelegates will be relevant this year and certainly don't know why there's so much talk about them at this juncture.

[Orsino]

11. Yep, nothing to worry about yet...

...and probably nothing to be done about it if it becomes a thing.

[Garrett78]

12. Agreed.

Now, if everyone else would agree, we could probably eliminate 20+ threads.

[Capt. Obvious]

10. People need to hear about the threats of violence that Berniebros are making to Supers

or things that some people can say represent threats of violence.

[Beacool]

13. It's due to the Sanders campaign's new strategy.

On a call some days ago, Weaver and Devine suggested that Sanders would try to chip away super delegates from Hillary. A talking point that Sanders doubled down on during an interview with Rachel Maddow. Initially they were saying that in states where Sanders had won by a large margin the super delegates should switch to him, now they have expanded that strategy. They are now suggesting that at the convention, even if Sanders is behind in pledged delegates, that the super delegates should switch to him because he polls higher against Trump than Hillary (although polls show that they both would win against Trump).

That is outrageous and is subverting the will of the people. Super delegates are not going to switch from someone who has more pledged delegates. She's also ahead in the popular vote. In 2008 they switched from Hillary to Obama because he had a bit over 100 more pledged delegates than she did. Hillary currently is ahead by double the amount of pledged that Obama had in 2008.

I find the Sanders' campaign strategy to be disingenuous and undemocratic. Imagine the outrage from his campaign and his supporters if Sanders was ahead in pledged delegates and the nomination was denied to him.

[Garrett78]

14. Calling that a "strategy" is a stretch.

When the pledged delegate count ends up being something like 2225 to 1825, good luck getting 500+ superdelegates to support the 1825 candidate.