You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience.

Alaskan Superdelegate Still Won't Back Bernie Sanders After Sanders Wins 81.6% of Alaska's Vote

The Huffington Post The Huffington Post 31/03/2016 Brian Hanley

2016-03-31-1459396558-5965531-berniepissed.jpg © Provided by The Huffington Post 2016-03-31-1459396558-5965531-berniepissed.jpg
If Bernie Sanders wins 57% of the remaining pledged delegates, he will surpass Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary and be well positioned to ask the superdelegates to transfer their support over to him, as they did for Obama in 2008. But what if the superdelegates don't switch this time? What if, despite Sanders winning the popular vote, the superdelegates decide to support Clinton anyway? Can they even do that?
How could Democratic representatives possibly do something so undemocratic? How could millions of people who voted accept such an oligarchical slap in the face?
The answers to these questions are finally surfacing, thanks to leaked conversations between Sanders supporters and Democratic superdelegates.
Levi Younger, an Alaskan resident who caucused for Sanders, recently contacted Alaskan superdelegate Kim Metcalfe, kindly asking her to back Sanders.
In Alaska, Sanders won over 81% of the vote and Younger's request was predicated on the logic that Metcalfe should represent the overwhelming will of her state.
You would think, in a democracy, and especially within the "Democratic" Party, a superdelegate like Metcalfe would side with the 81.6% majority that unequivocally chose Sanders over Clinton. But no, not so fast...
Metcalfe doesn't care what Alaskan voters want. She doesn't care who they voted for. Metcalfe is as stubborn as a mule. She's picking Clinton no matter what.
This is a real conversation between Younger (the Sanders supporter) and Metcalfe (the superdelegate). What you read here may make you question our democracy:

Younger (Sanders supporter): "While I understand your personal preferences would naturally come first (you are human after all) and conversations with Bernie supporters (not the man himself) would possibly leave a bad taste in your mouth, I believe that the people's vote should probably have heavier precedent. Unless you were implying that it's we are in charge of who you vote for, but rather something/someone else. Sanders will only be our nominee if those we've chosen to represent us do exactly that."
Metcalfe (superdelegate): "Again, negative conversations about our candidates do nothing to further Sanders's cause."
Younger (Sanders supporter): "I'm not sure how negative it is to question your voting discretion in spite of overwhelming support. If critiquing Hillary or your apprehension to accurately vote for those you represent is negative, then I'm not sure you're the one I'd like representing me."
Metcalfe (superdelegate): "Because I believe Hillary Clinton would be a better president. End of conversation."
Younger (Sanders supporter): "And that's why people get angry. Bernie supporters can be quite vapid. But voting in opposition to what we voted for is only supporting the idea that Hillary and her supporting super delegates are in the pockets of others... Bernie won in Alaska. End of story. Your personal preferences for president are represented in your vote as a citizen. Not as a representative of your state."
Metcalfe (superdelegate): "I'm in the pocket of no one. I have no financial connections to Hillary Clinton or any other Democrat. I am a retired union representative. I put in my time in the trenches for 40 years, and I really object to someone like you who has probably done nothing except caucus telling me what to do. I am voting for the best interests of my country. And that would be Hillary Clinton."
Younger (Sanders supporter): "You're not making a concerted effort to vote for the public. I am the public. Everyone who 'did nothing but caucus' did exactly like we should. We voted. You, ma'm[sic] are the one who is missing the point. You said it yourself, you're voting for interests. But they're not mine not the rest of the, what 75% of the state who opposed the Establishment (40 year Democratic veterans content with the status quo) and their choice for us.
Metcalfe (superdelegate): "You know it all."
Younger (Sanders supporter): "Thank you for your time Kim. You're stealing this for Hillary. And you're rubbing it in all our faces. If you find these comments 'negative' it's because what you are doing is wrong. As a citizen you get to vote for your choice. As a rep, you vote for us. In the end, we'll hold you accountable."
Metcalfe (superdelegate): "Sure. You'll be involved after the election?"
Younger (Sanders supporter): "You better believe it now. Having someone tell you your vote doesn't matter is enough to insight[sic] a riot."
Metcalfe (superdelegate): "Now you're talking like Donald Trump."
You can find the full conversation below courtesy of U.S. Uncut:


© Provided by The Huffington Post

More from Huffington Post

The Huffington Post
The Huffington Post
image beaconimage beaconimage beacon