Should super delegates make Sanders the nominee even if Clinton gets more pledged delegates?

[KingFlorez]

Judging from what Sanders campaign staffer said about going to the convention, it seems as if the strategy moving forward is for Sanders to lobby super delegates to vote for him at convention?

This is a serious question. Should Sanders be the nominee even if he ends up with fewer pledged delegates than Clinton?

At this point, it might be wiser for Democrats to just placate Sanders and give him what he wants in order to move forward to the general election. I'm almost to the point where I think the DNC should just let him have the damn nomination so all the divisiveness stops.

And I am talking about absent a scandal or anything like that.

[UMTerp01]

1. NO!! The END!! n/t

[LonePirate]

2. Superdelegates should not overturn the will of the pledged delegate voters regardless of the outcome

They should not do it for Bernie. They should not do it for Hillary.

[DetroitSocialist83]

3. We could have avoided this

By not having super delegates.

[Kalidurga]

4. It really depends on what happens between now and June

There are a couple of big stories brewing right now so, I am going to wait til more facts are in before I say he should definitely get the nomination no matter how many delegates Hillary has.

Normally I would just say who ever has the most wins. And I think Bernie will have the most so it won't be a topic up for debate anyway. But, lets say something shakes out of this Panama story I have no idea what besides speaking fees. If something big does come out of that though I think people are going to want a stronger candidate for the GE.

[BillZBubb]

5. Only in a rare situation.

One might be an unfavorable outcome to the FBI investigation. If that happens the super delegates should move to Sanders. Actually, Hillary should suspend her campaign and free the delegates, but that wouldn't happen.

The second might be if Sanders keeps winning the remainder of the primaries, but doesn't quite get enough delegates to win, he's got momentum and clearly at this time Democrats who are voting favor him over Hillary.

Third the Panama papers and the Clinton Foundation may turn out to be big negative factors going forward. The republicans will be investigating the Clinton Foundation for the entire Clinton presidency if she is elected. There appear to be a lot of skeletons in that closet. Sanders hasn't gone after that, the republicans will.

[Splinter Cell]

6. If they want to hold the White House, they should.

Clinton is a terrible candidate.

[mythology]

9. If the person leading is a "terrible candidate"

logically speaking, the candidate losing to the "terrible candidate" must be more terrible as he can't even muster enough to beat a "terrible candidate".

I really don't get why Sanders supporters think calling Clinton a terrible candidate is a way to get people to vote for the guy losing to her.

[LostOne4Ever]

7. If Clinton has more pledge delegates at the end she should get the nomination

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]Similarly if Bernie had more votes and pledge delegates he should win.

Both Superdelegates and caucuses and this overly long nomination process all need to be gotten rid of, and we need a massive reform of our nomination system.

I wish we had a short nomination period (a month or two) based solely upon the votes of the people in a single primary on a single day that was done nationwide. Whoever has the most votes from the people of the democratic party should get the nomination.

I think the way we do things now is a detriment to the party, the people of the party, the candidates, and to the democratic process itself.[/font]

[global1]

8. I Have To Believe That The Down Ballot Dem Candidates Will Have Some Say In The....

Super Delegate question. Note I posted this elsewhere here tonight - but I'll expand a bit here and now.

If the down ballot Dems think that they will lose their jobs with Hillary as the nominee - they will put pressure on the Super D's to change their affiliation to Bernie. In fact - some of the down ballot Dems might even be Super D's and switch on their own.

Bernie is in this to the end. He won't drop out. So he will continue to be a thorn in Hillary's side. That's why I hear she's going 'scorched earth' against Bernie between now and NY. Personally I think that is a failed strategy. Going negative on Bernie will backfire. All he has to do is stick to what he's been saying since he started in this race. He's a pretty cool cookie when it comes to debates - and you got to believe the New York crowd will pick up on Hillary attempting to be mean to him.

So I would say - watch for some unrest in the down ballot Dem candidates who want to attach themselves to the coattails of the person that be the strongest candidate in November. Especially if Bernie wins in NY.

Back when this all started - Hillary was the presumptive nominee. The word was that she was a shoe-in. Then the wheels fell off this whole primary process on both the Repug and Dem side. Who would have anticipated a Trump or a Bernie back at the beginning being such strong threats to the establishment. With the strong anti-establishment sentiment in the country now - I think it is finally sinking in that maybe the Super D's better re-examine the situation and their affiliations.

This is going to be interesting to watch - get the popcorn ready.

[hellofromreddit]

10. As a group the superdelegates should abstain from voting

...to protest the existence of the superdelegate system.

Yes, I know it won't happen.

[Iliyah]

11. The answer is NO.

Many Americans believe that the President and VP are elected by popular vote. That popular vote wins the nominations for both party as well. No for both. Pledged delegates is what wins the nomination. HRC is far ahead and will remain far ahead. BS missed his target tonight in WI. I will congrat him on his win, but also congrat HRC on remaining the front runner.