• @Windex007@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    35 months ago

    Delegates are bound to support in all good conscience the person for whom their primaries results reflect.

    This bizzare turn of phrase has been largely been untested in the courts… But if, in good conscience, the delegates believe that the results of the primary were for the candidate who was best poised to defeat Trump (as in, they’re not supporting Biden specifically as much as they are against Trump, for example) then they could argue that based on events that have occured since the primaries that they are in good conscience representing those wishes.

    So, I dunno. I’m very glad Biden took the high road here, but I am unconvinced that this was truely set in stone. This is the exact justification for having delegates choose the nominee in the first place; that in certain critical conditions they can act in good faith.

    • @Carrolade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      I think that would be an extremely minority opinion far outside of the moderate dem mainstream. Since the electors get specifically chosen by the winning campaign, expecting some kind of broad revolt out of them is very wishful thinking.

      Additionally, Biden was polling very close to Trump during a time when dems have been outperforming polls in our recent elections. Someone would have to be fairly ignorant of the actual voting results of recent races to actually think Biden genuinely had no chance. I do not think very many chosen delegates are ignorant of these election results, unlike more casually-engaged citizens online.