It isn’t that there are too few of them, it’s that they wouldn’t risk alienating their voting base by tipping the nomination. Remember, most of them backed Hillary in ‘08, but changed their vote when it became clear Obama was going to win with the actual voters.

The primary system is how our parties choose which candidate they will nominate for president. Along with their nominations comes a lot of party money to pay for ads and the like. Most states have a voting primary, where you go to a voting booth and cast your ballot (exactly as you normally would in a regular…

If they’re inconsequential then why do they exist at all?

2008 was for all practical purposes decided in March, we just had to watch Hillary Clinton flail around a few more months insisting it was just a flesh wound. As irritating as it was for her to hang on that long, I don’t think there’s any reason to believe the extended primary damaged Obama’s chances in the general.…

It is hardly inconsequential, it’s 15% of the delegates. It is absolutely enough to override the popular vote.

I expect the Democrats to win the general election for the sixth time in seven elections. I certainly hope we get the electoral votes to match.

There was never any concern about not being able to count votes fast enough. That was never the reason. Counting votes wasn’t a big deal (it’s all done in small local districts within districts just like today) they just didn’t expect overnight results.

The electoral college was always about voter suppression. The superdelegates are like a mini electoral college, except the votes can be bought. Hillary had 350 pledges before the first debate even took place. It’s complete nonsense.

Well, I agree that a party delegation constitutes a form of voter suppression. But I’m pretty far out there in left-libertarian anarcho-socialist green party territory. In the 21st Century, there is no need for a delegation or even an electoral college to speedily and accurately assess votes and enact the will of the…

I don’t think the vote is fixed, but I do think the system is rigged. Well, I KNOW the system is rigged. That’s what those of us disillusioned voters are fighting against. Anyway, the popular vote winner will win. I’m not stressing it.

its a fail safe for the party that probably will never be used

Hillary had a lot more SD then Obama did, but they jumped ship to avoid voting against the people choice.

No whining. This is exactly what you get when you allow two private political clubs to dominate the election process.

“It’s never happened before” isn’t particularly reassuring. I’d much rather that the DNC didn’t have the option in the first place. Superdelegates are inherently undemocratic and antithetical to representative democracy.

i mean just on principle

I don’t think it is biased to acknowledge that he went from “that guy? LOLZ” to where he is at now. That is a mark of excellent campaigning, no matter who you plan to vote for.

The same thing happened in 2008 when Hillary faced off against Barack Obama. She gathered up most of the Superdelegates, but lost them to him as the primaries went on. The Superdelegates do not have to stick to one candidate and can change at any time.

tfw in the 1980s the DNC decided you were too dumb to vote so they’d handle it for you

I’m still pissed off about the Madeline Albright/Gloria Steinem comments, sorry.

But that’s always been the pitch, hasn’t it? According to Republican talking points there’s an Abortion Industry whose only interest is maximizing the number of abortions they perform because they’re somehow immensely profitable. And it seems like abortion doctors are jumping out from behind bushes and ambushing…