Is it true that Bernie Sanders has no chance of winning as long as a DNC uses superdelegates?
- Anonymous1 week agoFavorite Answer
Pretty much. Also, Hillary will kill people for the hell of it
- Anonymous1 week ago
In a word, no.
Look, the idea of the superdelegates as some sort of crooked scheme which robbed Sanders of the nomination is bunk. To begin with, there was nothing that stopped Sanders from trying to get super delegates on his side, particulalry ahead of the 2020 race. That's what Barack Obama did in 2008. He lined up support from party members before he made his run. Sanders chose not to do that. He chose to cede the field to Clinton on this. And he knew the rules when he got into the game.
But the bigger problem with this notion is that Clinton didn't win because of the super delegates. She won because 55% of Democratic primary voters voted for her, while only 43% voted for Bernie Sanders. That's why he lost: because the Democratic electorate rejected him. The die hard Sanders supporters in 2016 made the same fundamental error that the die hard Trump supporters did: they assumed because they felt incredibly strongly about their candidate that this meant that he would win the vote. In both cases they were wrong. In fact, Sanders lost a lot worse to Clinton than Trump did. The superdelegates didn't decide anything.
Sanders problem in 2020 isn't his lack of superdelegate support. It's his lack of support among voters. The results of the primary so far have obscured that. People are talking about Bernie Sanders being on top, but that's not really justified. So far, in terms of wins and losses, his results are exactly the same as in 2016: he came in a technical second in Iowa but got almost as many votes as the front runner, and he won in New Hampshire. But what's not getting talked about a lot is that this result masks a real collapse in support for Sanders, so far at least. In 2016, Sanders got 49% of the vote in Iowa and 60% in New Hampshire. This year he got 26% in Iowa and 25% in New Hampshire. It's a huge drop in support. Sanders also doesn't seem to be bringing out many new voters. While turnout for the 2020 New Hampshire primary was the highest ever, Sanders number of voters actually went down. In 2016 he got 150,000 votes. This year he got only 76,000. Sanders also doesn't seem to have solved one of his big problems from 2016: his relative lack of appeal among black voters. Anything can happen in the coming weeks, and perhaps we'll see a surge of popularity. But so far, Sanders has been performing about as expected in the polls. It's other candidates, notably Pete Buttigieg and then Amy Klobuchar in New Hampshire, who have seen surges of support. Sanders may very well have a ceiling of support which is high enough for him to win some of these early races in a divided field, but not high enough for him to get a majority of the vote overall.
- DUMPTRUMP2020Lv 71 week ago
No. And if you’ll remember, Hillary didn’t even need the super delegates to win the nomination in 2016. The rules have changed:
On August 25, 2018, the Democratic National Committee agreed to reduce the influence of superdelegates by generally preventing them from voting on the first ballot at the Democratic National Convention, allowing their votes only in a contested nomination.
- Curtis 1911Lv 71 week ago
Giving the front runner Bernie the boot two elections in a row is a total admission of deep state Democrats running the primaries and not the voters.
I think if Bernie is the front runner and denied the nomination again, the democrats party will take a huge hit and lose half of their supporters to Bernie's new third party.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- DaddioLv 71 week ago
It used to be true but, with the left turn in the party, it might not be true any more