A slew of national and swing state polls (here, here, here, and here) show that Hillary Clinton is presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump’s best chance to gain the American presidency. With Clinton at the head of the ticket, what should have been a blowout and an electoral landslide for Democrats is instead a tight race. And the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has not even concluded its criminal investigation into Clinton’s illegal use of a private email server for all of her State Department responsibilities (including putting Top Secret and above born-classified information on an unclassified, unencrypted system).
Neither Hillary Clinton nor Bernie Sanders will go to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with enough pledged delegates selected by voters through primaries and caucuses to clinch the nomination outright.
Instead, the nominee will be chosen by so-called superdelegates; they are the swing vote that will decide who the Democratic presidential nominee will be. And they should choose Bernie Sanders even if he has a few hundred fewer pledged delegates than Hillary Clinton.
But wouldn’t that be undemocratic?
Yes. But almost all superdelegates chose to back a candidate before and not after their state’s primary vote or caucus was held. The superdelegate system is undemocratic no matter which way a superdelegate chooses to vote.
But Hillary Clinton is no George McGovern. McGovern was not under FBI investigation either as a candidate or the party’s nominee. McGovern’s spouse did not ride on private jets with convicted pedophiles where minors were sexually exploited. McGovern did not make millions of dollars from American and foreign corporations in exchange for political favors. McGovern did not vote for the Iraq war.
For the sake of the country, for the sake of the party, for the sake of averting a Trump presidency, superdelegates must choose Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton. She is a risky bet given Teflon Don‘s unmatched skill as a candidate while Sanders has consistently out-polled Clinton against Trump for the better part of a year. Unlike Clinton, he is completely scandal-free. Unlike Clinton, he is honest and trustworthy. Unlike Clinton, he represents change and if the 2016 presidential campaign has taught us anything, it is that 2016 is change election.
A vote for Clinton is a vote for Trump.