Argument: Superdelegates strike a nerve after 2000 Bush-Gore elections
- "Nancy Pelosi: Superdelegates Don’t Overrule The Voters". Blue Loggin, nytexan. February 16th, 2008 - "In a recent interview Nancy Pelosi gave a warning to the superdelegates 'do not to override the voters’ wishes.' Apparently Pelosi is listening to the voters and is aware of the problems the superdelegates can cause. After all, we can equal the override of the superdelegates to Al Gore winning the popular vote and the Supreme Court anointing Bush as President."
- Paul Rockwell. "Screw the Voters. Let Superdelegates Decide!". CommonDreams.org. February 18, 2008 - "what is the difference between superdelegate intervention in the outcome of the primary and the right-wing intervention in Florida in 2000, when Republican judges stopped the counting of votes, and appointed Bush as President? How many times will the loser in an election be imposed on the electorate?"
- Ari Emanuel. "My Brother the Superdelegate and Why I Don't Trust Him to Pick the Next President". February 10, 2008 - "After what Democrats went through in Florida in 2000, we should be the first to reject any such funny business. We should be as opposed to superdelegates changing the course of an election as we were to the Supreme Court appointing George W. Bush president."
- Paul Abrams. "SuperSolution for Superdelegates". February 9, 2008 - "As previously indicated ("Dealing With Deadlock, Superdelegates, Michigan and Florida: A Challenge to Both Campaigns", February 2, 2008*), the notion that Superdelegates would change the outcome of 50 state primaries and caucuses ought to be absolutely outrageous to anyone who believes a) in democracy; and b) in change, i.e., that peoples' voices will literally be heard.
- It is the intra-party equivalent to Bush v Gore, where the Supreme Court decided by 1 vote, in an unprecedented opinion that they indicated should not be viewed as precedent, that George Bush should be president."