Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

qdouble

(891 posts) Tue Jun 7, 2016, 03:36 PM Jun 2016

The media has a history of counting superdelegates before the convention

They counted them before the convention in 2008:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/23/uselections2008.barackobama

They counted them before the convention in 2004:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/nomination/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

There's not a lot of search results for 2000 and prior, but I'll assume that factoring in superdelegates is anything but a new phenomena.

Can we please stop acting as if the media is only tabulating superdelegates votes because they are somehow working for the Clinton campaign and want to steal the election from Bernie? Anyone making this claim obviously doesn't care about the truth of the matter.

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The media has a history of counting superdelegates before the convention (Original Post) qdouble Jun 2016 OP

It ISN'T new. But before people accepted that their candidate lost without whining. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #1

Do you think it's Bernie's fault? Have other second place candidates tried to influence their qdouble Jun 2016 #2

tonyt53

(5,737 posts)

1. It ISN'T new. But before people accepted that their candidate lost without whining.

Reply to qdouble (Original post)

Tue Jun 7, 2016, 03:38 PM

Jun 2016

qdouble

(891 posts)

2. Do you think it's Bernie's fault? Have other second place candidates tried to influence their