If You Were A SuperDelegate what criterium would you use to vote for the nominee? - Your judgment - Your local constituency's choice (e.g. you're a representative) - Your state's choice - The national leader in pledged delegates - The national leader in the popular vote w/o FL and MI - The national leader in the popular vote w FL and MI - Other
Like most of them, I suppose: a) my initial bias towards one or the other b) in case of a deadlock, which one would promise the most for my pet cause (in my case, the environment), but other delegate would be there to advance their own agendas, whether it is health care reform, minority rights, gun laws, aboriton, on and on.
voting against the leader in states, Delegates, popular vote, etc would be seen as wanting to overturn the voters and the backlash would be massive if I was a SD...no way in hell I would want to be in that group and forever be asked why I ignored the voters
If the state chose one candidate decisively (5+%) then I'd go with that candidate. Otherwise, I'd go with the leader in pledged delegates nationally.
What grover said. A clear leader in my state would get my vote. After that, it comes down to who has the most overall delegates. BTW, I hate this super delegate stuff. I understand why they have it but I disagree with it. Seems like a way for the party big wigs to insure that they still control stuff. Smacks of elitism.
Option #1 That is the point of being a SuperDelegate afterall. Still think the idea is past its time.
The candidates appear to be thinking that the superdelegates will end up voting for whichever candidate gives them the most money. (Is there some legal term for this process???) The Hell B_tch has given out a couple hundred thousand bucks to them and B. Hussein Obama has given them something in excess of six hundred thousand. Plenty of time left for these sums to go up. Of course, all such monies are "campaign contributions."