He pushed for the removal of superdelegates from the process altogether and only got half of what he wanted and settled for it, how is that relevant to this.
-
-
Are you really arguing that superdelegates deciding the nominee is a good idea and likely to result in a nominee who can beat Trump?
-
I'm saying the historical argument is weak - the Democrats generally have tried to rally behind whoever the popular vote leader was coming into the convention and they lost all those elections anyway
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
In fact there is no clear historical precedent for what happens when the superdelegates "pick the nominee" - the closest you can say they came to doing that was 1988 and Dukakis objectively had a clear plurality of the popular vote the year (42%, to Jackson's 29%)
-
It's worth pointing out superdelegates exist in the first place because the Democrats had one of the worst losses in history in 1972 and wanted to prevent another McGovern
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.