Is there still a realistic path for Bernie Sanders to secure the Democratic Party's Presidential nomination? My guest today on The BradCast says "Yes!" and explains how it would, could and, in his opinion, should happen. [Audio link for show is at end of article.]
But first, some breaking news as the state of Maryland decertifies the results of the April 26th primary election in Baltimore, due to a number of troubling and currently unexplained "irregularities" brought to their attention by Election Integrity advocates; The Obama Administration issues historic new regulations concerning the release of methane which, our own Desi Doyen describes as "a very big deal"; And Donald Trump and Paul Ryan meet to smooth over disagreements as the GOP continues to coalesce behind their presumptive Republican nominee.
Then, I'm joined by Huffington Post columnist, attorney, author and University of New Hampshire Asst. Professor Seth Abramson to discuss his latest column headlined: "Bernie Sanders Could Still Win the Democratic Nomination --- No, Seriously".
Abramson offers a persuasive, if provocative scenario, for how the Democratic Party may end up nominating Bernie Sanders at their convention this July in Philadelphia, particularly if he keeps winning primaries between now and mid-June and more bad polls --- like recent ones from Reuters and from Quinnipiac --- show her tied with or losing to Trump in head-to-head matchups both nationally and in key swing-states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.
To understand his argument, you must also understand why the Democrats instituted their system of unpledged "Super Delegates" consisting of party insiders and elected officials in the first place. He offers the history of how that system came about following the party's contested 1980 convention, and explains why the Party may come to decide this year that it's the right time to invoke that system for the purpose for which it was originally created.
"The only time that Super Delegates are activated," Abramson explains, "the only time that they really matter, and they're actually doing something other than just showing up to the convention and validating what's already happened, is when they are in fact contradicting the will of the popular vote and the delegate count, and are voting down a presumptive nominee. The reason they would do that is the same reason they would have wanted to do that in 1980, and that's if they think that the presumed nominee cannot win the fall election."
Abramson, a long-time Sanders supporter, details the specific, if plausible scenario he says would need to unfold over the next several weeks of remaining Primaries and how, as he argues, "I don't think it at that point it becomes a question of whether the Super Delegates would change their [support for Clinton]...The only question is how many of them would." In his scenario, he says, party insiders will be forced to ask themselves what needs to be done to avoid electing Trump to the White House, who he describes as "one of the most dangerous politicians ever to run for office in American history."
But what about rejecting the collective popular will of Democratic Party primary and caucus voters in such a scenario? What of the early states that initially supported Clinton in such huge numbers? And what of the arguments that the Sanders campaign has made in the past concerning the undemocratic nature of so-called Super Delegates? Tune in for Abramson's responses to all of those questions and more!
Finally today, we close out once again with another explosive edition of the Green News Report...
(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)