A candidate that gets 35% of the votes shouldn't win. But a candidate that gets 25% should!

[DanTex]

This is the argument that the superdelegates will be trying to feed the voters if they decide to go with someone who didn't get the most votes. It's obviously not going to work, because a 5-year-old could understand how absurdly illogical and undemocratic that is. Which is why it would fracture the party and lead to Trump's re-election, likely in a landslide, with losses downballot as well.

Yes, the rules state that the supers can do whatever they want. They superdelegates could vote for Rush Limbaugh if they wanted. But "can" and "should" are entirely different things. There is talk of superdelegates wanting to stop Bernie. The way to do that is at the ballot box. If another candidate gets more pledged delegates than Bernie, by all means, that candidate should be the nominee. And that could still happen.

But if Bernie rolls into the convention with the most pledged delegates, and it goes to a second ballot, then the superdelegates will have a decision to make. Do they want to stop Bernie, or do they want to stop Trump? For the sake of the planet, I hope they make the right decision.

People need to understand the level of anti-establishment sentiment going around. Especially among younger voters, for whom the system is simply not working. Nothing could be more emblematic of an out-of-touch elite than a bunch of party insiders deciding to ignore the candidate who got the most votes for a candidate that the establishment thinks is more palatable. It would be a disaster.

We need to defeat Trump. Seriously, no fooling around.