# Dems: has the superdelegate count tainted the nomination? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 8, 2016, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791 "2016-06-08T00:14:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2016, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/41 "2016-06-08T17:44:48Z")
> [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](#): > > Superdelegates are sort of like the Royal Assent of the Democratic Party - technically they can be used as an override, but they’ll only keep this power so long as it’s never used. I have no doubt that if Sanders had pulled ahead of Clinton in pledged delegates / popular vote that the supers would have duly changed allegiance, just as they did in 2008 when they shifted to support Obama after he won the nomination by those metrics. When it’s a two person race I would mostly agree with you. Where it would be interesting would be an almost even 3 way race with the establishment’s choice being slightly behind. Say it was 34% Lieberman, 34% Sanders, 32% Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2016, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/42 "2016-06-08T21:13:56Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Republicans wish they had superdelegates now, it might have saved them from the ignoramus they’re going to nominate. Not this year. The only other candidate they had with a respectable delegate haul was Cruz. I suspect they mistrust and despise him even more than Trump, and that he’d do at least as badly in the general. ---
**Author:** ![Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de0a6/32.png) [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambrosio_Spinola)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2016, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/43 "2016-06-08T22:05:33Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > When it’s a two person race I would mostly agree with you. Where it would be interesting would be an almost even 3 way race with the establishment’s choice being slightly behind. Say it was 34% Lieberman, 34% Sanders, 32% Clinton. That would be a pretty interesting situation - but the superdelegates only account for 15% of the total delegates. This year that means that the supers could only make someone win on the first ballot if they had 1668 out of 4051 pledged delegates (just over 41%). A situation where you had three candidates where everyone got 1/3 of the delegates would revert to a contested convention knife fight like the old days, I guess. It also limits just how much shoving the supers are actually capable of. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2016, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/44 "2016-06-08T22:17:39Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Superdelegates didn’t confirm the voters’ choice, most them decided before a single vote was cast. Hardly. They get on the Winner bandwagon. The SuperDelegates went to Obama in 2008, even tho before the elections started he was a outside contender. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2016, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/45 "2016-06-08T22:24:08Z")
On the contrary. It would make the supers quite powerful and give them reasonable justification to flex that power. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2016, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/46 "2016-06-16T20:20:19Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > The superdelegate pledge is not binding until they get to the floor yet everyone (except the NYT) includes them in the count. Has that actually affected the primary/caucus vote viz Clinton has gotten more vote because everyone want to vote for a winner and/or fewer votes for Sanders because why bother he’s going to lose? Well, to a small extent. But no more that the undemocratic caucus system or open primaries have. But Clinton is now, and have always been, leading by a very comfortable % in the popular vote. If every state had no supers and just a plain closed primary, Sanders would never even have been a blip. The “shenanigans” _helped_ Bernie. Immensely. ---
**Author:** ![aag3981](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aag3981](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aag3981)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2016, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/47 "2016-06-17T06:08:58Z")
If the Bernie Bros want to really fight the establishment, the answer is not to hound the Democratic Party by suddenly jumping into the game and then getting mad when they can’t change the rules so they can win. Bernie Bros need to go after all the little rules and policies that Republicans and Democrats have put in place over the years that make it nearly impossible for any other parties to become relevant. Things like polling limits before another party can enter a debate. Sanders wasn’t a democrat and openly admitted that he only used that platforms for coverage and relevance. Only democrats should be allowed to vote for who will be on the democratic ticket. Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2016, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/48 "2016-06-17T11:30:34Z")
Ordinarily the superdelegate issue would never have been an issue. The problem this year is that the democrats included in their nomination process someone who was never a democrat but an independent, non-party progressive, who wanted to use the party platform and process to promote his message. Sanders was committed to his own message, not the democratic party. I suspect in the years going forward they might tinker with the delegate process to ensure that it avoids the appearance of impropriety, but they’ll also probably go to great lengths to make sure that outsiders never again become disruptive political forces. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2016, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/49 "2016-06-17T17:20:38Z")
Tell you what. I’ll agree to throw out ALL the superdelegate votes if the Bernies will agree to abide by the pledged delegate totals. [Clinton: 2219 Trump: 1832](http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/parties/democrat) Or by the primary vote totals. [Cinton: 16 million Trump: 12.3 million](http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/democratic-primary-numbers-n592271) Or by the total number of primaries and caucases won: Clinton: 34 Sanders: 22 Feel free to suggest another metric. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/50 "2016-06-17T22:39:16Z")
Applauseometer? ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2016, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791/51 "2016-06-18T01:27:28Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Where it would be interesting would be an almost even 3 way race with the establishment’s choice being slightly behind. Say it was 34% Lieberman, 34% Sanders, 32% Clinton. Percent of what? If one candidate was dramatically ahead in votes, and a different candidate had a tiny lead in the number of pledged elected delegates, I think the superdelegates then would be justified in picking either. In a situation where, by all measures, one candidate is ahead, that who they should, and will, support. The real rigging is in the rotten boroughs like caucus states, territories, and Democrats Abroad, where one vote has far more power in terms of electing delegates than where I live. The reform that’s needed is to equalize the number of primary votes it takes to send one delegate to the convention. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-has-the-superdelegate-count-tainted-the-nomination/756791.md?page=2)