It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Whatever one thinks of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Chair of the Democratic National Committee, we can all agree on one thing: there is no greater authority on the topic of so-called "super-delegates" to the Democratic National Convention (an event Wasserman Schultz runs) than Wasserman Schultz herself.
And Wasserman Schultz has been clear, as evident from the video above, that the national news media must stop tallying and reporting "super-delegates" immediately.
"The way the media is reporting this is incorrect," Wasserman Schultz told Rachel Maddow of MSNBC on February 20th. "There are not pledged delegates -- or 'super-delegates' -- earned at any of these caucus contests."
What in the hell?
You honestly believe that the DNC will listen to the people and ignore their own agenda to get Hillary elected?
If that's the case, and they do listen to the people, then they will show that they have more honor and ethics than the GOP who are doing whatever they can to eliminate Trump, even though it's "the will of the people".
originally posted by: theantediluvian
He's not winning in terms of pledged delegates. Even though the win in Michigan was indeed shocking, it was narrow and the delegates were proportionally allocated so he only ended up winning seven more delegates than Clinton did. The same day she picked up like 30 delegates to his 4 in Mississippi. So on the day, Clinton won 19 delegates more than Sanders (90 v 71). The current pledged delegate totals are:
Clinton - 762
Sanders - 549
The media should stop reporting on super delegate counts. It's an almost certainty that whoever gets the most pledged delegates is going to get the nomination because the super delegates are not stupid enough to sink the DNC by usurping the will of the primary voters. To keep showing the super delegate totals is leaving people with a false impression that Sanders would be leading if it "wasn't for the super delegates!"
I guess I'm the only not surprised that DWS doesn't want that?
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: neo96
Super delegates do serve a purpose...in a contested convention when a race is tight, they CAN tip the scales in one candidate's favor. They aren't supposed to be used in the way the media is using them ...
Oh well, the media did the same kinds of things to Ron Paul.