We keep hearing Bernie Sanders and his campaign team say we’ll be having a contested convention in Philadelphia. His supporters here insist that a contested convention is a certainty. Since there are only two candidates, this seems unlikely, since one or the other will have the most delegates.
Where, I suspect, communication is breaking down is over the role of Superdelegates: unbound Party leaders and Elected Officials. The contested convention advocates seem to treat them in a different category, apparently on the belief that either they don’t vote at the same time (and thus, neither Clinton nor Sanders will “win” not having enough pledged delegates to reach a majority), or that somehow the hundreds of delegates supporting Clinton will for somehow change their allegiance. The first assumption is wrong (Superdelegate votes are included in each State’s tally); the second assumption is unsupported.
So, let’s consider the following. It is June 15. DC has held its Primary and has ended the voting period. Clinton is leading in Pledged delegates by 250 or so; neither Clinton nor Sanders has enough pledged delegates (2383 needed) to claim victory. Assuming no additional changes, Clinton will have 520 supportive Superdelegates; Sanders will have 39 (NYT tally) and about 175 will not have announced a preference. Clinton’s combination of Pledged and Superdelegates is enough to win on the first ballot. There are five weeks until the Convention.
You claim that Sanders will conest the Convention. What happens now?