Reply to Wall Street Journal article says Clinton might not be the nominee

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Wall Street Journal article says Clinton might not be the nominee"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This article is phenomenally stupid. The press has been engaging in a months-long fiction that there is still a real race for the Democratic nomination going on.

There is zero chance, even if Bernie has a shockingly lopsided win in California, that he will be anywhere close to Clinton in pledged delegates. [b]So the article's theory depends on the superdelegates, who overwhelmingly support Clinton, deciding en masse to overturn the will of the voters.[/b]

Look at it this way: Imagine that the Republicans had superdelegates and Bush or Rubio had been leading in delegates heading into California, and then Trump pulled off a big win in California. Does anyone think the Republican superdelegates would, en masse, abandon Bush or Rubio to join the Trump train? That is essentially what the Wall Street Journal is imagining would happen on the Democratic side. It is nonsense.[/quote]
This would be true had the superdelegates waited until the will of the voters was known before declaring their support.  But no, many of them declared their support for Clinton before any voting occurred let alone voting within their own state/districts.[/quote]

It’s the Democratic way!!![/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics