Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
This.
About half are democrats in congress and democratic governors.
The rest are mayors and other democratic party types.
represents 15% total; as of now it has never decided an election, and if Sanders starts winning other state primaries, you will see a change in how some of these initial ones get committed.
|
But what is the logic behind it? Why i sth enomination process more democratic with the super-delegates?
And there was a lot of controversy in 2008, when it came down to the wire between Hilary and Weird Harold. She won the popular vote, he had the super delegates. Then, there was this weird situation where the DNC "punished" some states for having their primaries too early, by reducing the number of regular (non-super)delegates those states represented. I doin't remember who won those states or if it turned out to matter.
But I cannot imagine what the point of them is, except to undermine the democratic process, in the admittedly unlikely event that a non-establishment candidate wins a majority of the regular delegates. The king-makers want to make sure they approve of who the herd nominates. What other possible explanation is there?
I don't think it exists on the GOP side, and for good reason. As horrified as I am at the prospect of a Trump nomination, if he wins enough states, he has earned the right to be the nominee.