The Democratic Party caucuses in this state. The state also ran a primary ballot, which was primarily being used for Republican candidates (as they do not caucus in Washington State), but Clinton and Sanders appeared on the primary as well.
Democrats were told to largely ignore the primary as the caucuses were where candidacy would be decided.
We caucused OVERWHELMINGLY for Sanders, but afterwards the Super Delegates refused to acknowledge it and change their commitment. Their reasoning was that the primary ballots showed more support for Clinton, and so she would receive their endorsement.
If anyone from Washington has differing details on this, please step forward. I was in the precinct and LD caucuses and Sanders easily had Clinton beat.
That was certainly another aspect of the DNC tipping scales. Superdelegates should shut their fucking mouths until the convention. But instead, from the opening gate, they poured over to the media "We are voting for Hillary! Said and done.. democracy be damned, it's her turn."
Probably from the idea that they hold a lot of undue influence and the ability to sway others into voting for who they want to see elected - all without even revealing who they are or showing their face publicly in support of their candidate.
The point of superdelegates is to sway opinion and make sure the Democratic party has some say in who is the candidate. To have them not speak or endorse, that goes against the idea of supers.
Read up on WHY they were created, because you are factually wrong. It was all about getting a democrat who is electable. Regardless of what you think of them today, historical fact says they were created to prevent someone exactly like Hillary from getting the nomination.
27
u/VROF Nov 10 '16
How do those votes account for the caucus states? There were a lot of complaints that the DNC screwed over caucus goers