there are scenarios where someone with 30% of the delegates could have the most Pledged Delegates but shouldn't be nominated. Wasn't there are case like that in 1952 or 1956 with Estes Kefauver. Actually, it looks like he had only about 25% on the first ballot. A candidate could suffer a debilitating health condition or any number of other reasons why a mere plurality should not be enough

https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGNI_enUS584US584&q=1952+democratic+nomination

But the principle that the candidate with the most votes win is as close to a sacred principle as you can get.

There is no justification for the one with fewer pledged delegates to be given the nomination.

Plurality doesn't mean you win.

If you have multiple candidates and no candidate has a clear plurality or majority of pledged delegates then I can see the Super Delegates weighing in... For instance Candidate A has 33.7% of the delegates, Candidate B has 33.2% of the delegates and Candidate C has 33.1% of the delegates then the Supers can weigh in.

But that is such an unlikely scenario. though 84 was reasonably close.

that are far more democratic in nature that could be used before anyone would have to turn to such a stupid undemocratic system as super delegates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system

You have to have the majority or you don't win. It isn't about just getting a plurality. If you don't have the plurality, then there are new rules in place. Everyone knows this going in.

I can see the Supers putting their fingers on the scale in a close race but to give them more power than that turns the primary season into a farce that would have as much legitimacy as an Albanian election, circa 1980.


I could not in any circumstance see myself telling somebody his or her vote didn't count, no matter how much I disagreed with it. I can't think of a more sacred principle.

for example if said candidate:

Stopped winning states and leading in national polling
Got indicted
Evaded taxes by hiding money in Panama.

Stuff like that.

But we do have unfortunately different rules. Thus, you could see a close result in this election with either candidate in front and the Supers could potentially change that.

But yes, I have no problem if Sec. Clinton gets the nomination if she reaches the pledged majority.


O/T. I know you like and often reference sports, how about the bball game last night? Unreal.

and popular vote. Thay would destroy the party.

Tomato: fruit when raw, vegetable when cooked, mess when squished.

The DNC system uses some methods for choosing pledged delegates such as caucuses and conventions that are undemocratic and unrepresentative.

If one candidate held a small lead in pledged delegates stemming from a raft of caucus wins and the other is ahead considerably in the popular vote, I think both candidates would have compelling cases to make to the super delegates for why they should win the nomination.