The supers are supposed to be a failsafe, instead they were used as a propaganda tool.

[Bread and Circus]

It's pretty disgusting when you think about it.

[speaktruthtopower]

1. Yes, they were used as what economists call..

a barrier to entry.

[highprincipleswork]

2. And still being used as a propaganda tool and thumb on the scale. Not cool at all, especially when

money changed hands to make it so.

Like you say, we're supposed to be nominating the person with the best possible chance to win, not the person with the most entrenched interests with the powers that be.

[Renew Deal]

3. I agree

Sanders camp talking about overturning the will of the voters is disturbing and disgusting.

[Else You Are Mad]

4. But, pursuant to DWS

The super delegates are supposed to represent the party not the people. Don't believe me, ask Howard Dean why, if the citizens of his state overwhelmingly voted for Sanders he is voting for Clinton. That seems to me to be over turning the will of the voters....

[Skwmom]

10. DWS - Just call her Ms. Payday Lender.

[Bread and Circus]

6. I know you are trying to be cute but I actually agree Bernie should not try to overturn

The supers. If hillary has more pledged delegates she should win full stop.

But that's not what we are talking about.

What we are talking about is how the role of the supers has been cynically exploited for politcal gain by Hillary. They are a failsafe to guard against candidates like Trump. What Clinton did was to use them as a prop for the past 9 months.

[rjsquirrel]

8. Yes, I agree with that

It's appallingly undemocratic of the Sanders campaign to suggest superdegates switch votes to overturn the pledged delegate choices of millions more Hillary voters.

I'm sure that's what the OP means anyway!

Funny how arguments of convenience expose hypocrisy from the supposedly "progressive" side. Hillary leads by millions of votes and around a hundred pledged delegates.

The question then is why Sanders' supporters don't believe in the expressed will of millions of voters. Or in the Democratic Party making its own choice

Any port in a storm though. I guess overturning the will of Democratic Party voters is what they mean by "revolution."

[Bread and Circus]

11. How people like you feel so comfortable espousing bullshit

Boggles my mind

[Onlooker]

5. By both sides

It's stands to reason that if we did not have a superdelegate system, Bernie would in many ways be in even worse shape. The only reason he really still has a chance is because of the superdelegates.

[Bread and Circus]

7. I think I might agree with you, please elaborate.

[Onlooker]

12. Well ...

Hillary has been using the superdelegates for awhile to declare that she's so far ahead of Sanders, he doesn't have a chance, even though superdelegates aren't locked into anything and would likely side with whoever has more pledged (elected) delegates.

Bernie is using the superdelegates to say, "I still have a chance. If I can keep it close, I might be able to persuade enough of superdelegates to come over to my side and support me."

My opinion is that type of politicking by both sides is just part of the game of politics, and it's as old as democracy. Churchill once said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried." I think he was right!

[Bread and Circus]

14. I agree on the first two points but to say "that's just politics" is contemptable to me.

There is a lot of bad things in the world where people get hurt or robbed of their rights that be explained by "that's just politics".

No, it's not just politics. It is propaganda and it is wrong..

[Onlooker]

17. Yeah, it's wrong ...

But I don't think there's anyway to stop it. It's gone on throughout history and certainly dishonest politics is as old as our nation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1800

The campaign was bitter and characterized by slander and personal attacks on both sides. Federalists spread rumors that the Democratic-Republicans were radicals who would ruin the country (based on the Democratic-Republican support for the French Revolution). In 1798, George Washington had complained "that you could as soon scrub the blackamoor white, as to change the principles of a professed Democrat; and that he will leave nothing unattempted to overturn the Government of this Country".[6] Meanwhile, the Democratic-Republicans accused Federalists of subverting republican principles with the Alien and Sedition Acts, some of which were later declared unconstitutional after their expiration by the Supreme Court and relying for their support on foreign immigrants; they also accused Federalists of favoring Britain in order to promote aristocratic, anti-democratic values.[7]

Adams was attacked by both the opposition Democratic-Republicans and a group of so-called "High Federalists" aligned with Alexander Hamilton. The Democratic-Republicans felt that the Adams foreign policy was too favorable toward Britain; feared that the new army called up for the Quasi-War would oppress the people; opposed new taxes to pay for war; and attacked the Alien and Sedition Acts as violations of states' rights and the Constitution. "High Federalists" considered Adams too moderate and would have preferred the leadership of Alexander Hamilton instead. Hamilton, in his third sabotage attempt toward Adams,[8] schemed to elect vice-presidential candidate Charles Cotesworth Pinckney to the presidency. One of Hamilton's letters, a scathing criticism of Adams that was fifty-four pages long,[9] became public when it came into the hands of a Democratic-Republican. It embarrassed Adams and damaged Hamilton's efforts on behalf of Pinckney,[3] not to mention speeding Hamilton's own political decline.[9]

[Bread and Circus]

18. We are a shitty species in many ways, no doubt.

[TDale313]

9. The problem both parties are facing this time...

(As has been pointed out by others many times) is that they've set up this illusion that the nominating process is a small-d "democratic" process. It's not- the parties set the rules, we're voting for delegates, not the actual candidates. The party establishment still by and large choose the nominee. It might be fine if this were up front- but you let voters go through the process- work their hearts out for their candidate- get the most votes- only to then say "Oh, we're sorry- did we forget to mention we have a veto? We're giving it to the candidate we think is best. Make sure to vote for them in November. Thanks for playing." Yeah- not gonna go over well. It's rarely been a huge issue- most of the time the establishment got their choice or someone they could live with, and the Kubuki worked just fine. This year the antiestablishment push has been so strong in both parties it has pulled back the curtain and everyone is saying "Wait- it's possible the "winner" might not "win"?!?" That doesn't seem right"

[Lizzie Poppet]

13. Precisely. They were seldom (if ever) added to the count in previous primary campaigns.

Yet another way this one was rigged for Princess Weathervane...

[Cheese Sandwich]

15. There's nothing democratic about the Democratic Party

It's a tightly controlled authoritarian operation. Power flows from the top down.

[stillwaiting]

16. Their existence allowed the media to claim Hillary was inevitable from the beginning.

We must fight to get rid of them.

[JackRiddler]

19. A "failsafe" against what?!

Democracy?

The chance that some career politicians and lobbyists might fail to get elected if they ran as legitimate pledged delegates?

The paranoid nonsense that millions of crossover Republicans will vote in a Democratic primary and elect Rush Limbaugh's choice?

What is your "failsafe" protecting against?

[Bread and Circus]

20. A Trump-like candidate. Look, I don't really agree with it but that's what it's for. However Clinton

abused it this go around beyond all recognition.

Very sad.

[JackRiddler]

21. That is not the history.

Superdelegates were implemented to prevent candidates from the left.

[Bread and Circus]

22. Interesting, given that Obama was to the left of Hillary yet the superdelegates handed him...

the nomination in the end.

So check your own history.