FFS! I am tired of reading this S***

[MineralMan]

96. Nobody's "re-litigating" the 2016 primary.

It is history. However, history is very important when it comes to presidential nominees. Everyone should consider it, including the delegates at the convention. And they will.

At no time has a Democratic convention chosen a nominee who wasn't elected by a majority of delegates to the convention. Each candidate who has delegates will have them because voters voted in their primaries or caucuses for delegates for a particular candidate. At the convention, Bernie Sanders and every other candidate will have delegates at the convention pledged to that candidate. On the first ballot, almost every delegate will vote for the candidate he or she is pledged to.

On the second ballot, things change. For example, Amy Klobuchar will come to the convention with most of Minnesota's delegates pledged to her. That's almost certain. What is also almost certain is that after the first ballot, Klobuchar will not be viable and will not appear on the second ballot. Her pledged delegates will be free to vote for a different candidate. Most will not vote for Senator Sanders, if they were pledged to Amy. They will vote for a candidate with similar views and plans to those Senator Klobuchar stood for. Most of them will vote for a viable candidate who represents those views.

And so it goes, state by state. Delegates will do their best to vote as they believe the candidate they are pledged to would vote. Amy Klobuchar will probably indicate to her pledged delegates who she would like them to vote for, and most of them will follow her lead in the matter.

Why would any pledged delegate for any candidate who does not make it to the second (or third) ballot do otherwise? Why would they not listen to what the candidate to whom they were pledged requests them to do? They will follow that lead, because that was the "will of the voters."

You are being unrealistic here.