https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/broken-branches-america-s-checks-have-become-imbalanced-trump-era-n1136286
Sanders' new warning
Bernie Sanders says it would be “divisive” if pledged-delegate winner doesn’t become nominee, something that contradicts his 2016 position.
One of the reasons why some believe that Bernie Sanders is the front-runner for the Dem nomination is that, in a multiple-candidate field, he might have the easiest time to get a plurality of pledged delegates in the delegate race.
And, the thinking goes, if you get the most pledged delegates — whether it’s 51 percent, or 47 percent, or 35 percent — the Democratic superdelegates (who would get to vote on a second ballot) wouldn’t overturn that result.
Speaking with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes last night, Bernie Sanders articulated that view.
“In general, I think it is a fair statement to say that it would be very divisive. The convention would have to explain to the American people, 'Hey, Candidate X got the most votes and won the most delegates at the primary process, but we're not going to give him or her the nomination.” I think that would be a divisive moment for the Democratic Party.”
Except Bernie Sanders, his campaign and his supporters didn’t exactly share that opinion in 2016, when it was clear by April’s New York primary that Hillary Clinton had a plurality of pledged delegates (she would get a majority of pledged delegates by June).
Check out this Politico article from March 2016: “Sanders’ campaign thinks the next few weeks of the campaign calendar favor him and is preparing plans to make the uphill case to the superdelegates — the 718 activists and elected officials who can vote however they please — that his late-breaking momentum would make him a stronger nominee that they should support over Clinton.”
[...]
In other words: The superdelegates don't have to automatically break to the winner of the pledged delegates.