Once again this election cycle, I find myself disagreeing with the esteemed Dr. Charles Krauthammer. I found his dismissal of Donald Trump as a serious candidate short-sighted, and note with satisfaction that although he still does not approve of Trump, at least he reckons with the possibility of a Trump nomination.

The good doctor is betting on common sense and pragmatism among the ruling elites of the Democratic Party, which doesn’t strike me as a justifiable wager. On Special Report with Bret Baier yesterday, he expressed the opinion that the superdelegates pledged to Clinton will not force her nomination on the party if Bernie Sanders continues defeating her  -- which forcing is my preferred scenario for the election (video below):

Hillary got shellacked in New Hampshire, but still is walking away with as many delegates as Sanders (15 each with one superdelegate yet to speak). She has 394 superdelegates pledged to her, out of 2,382 needed to win.  The superdelegate system was in fact installed after 1968 to prevent a radical like Sanders (it was anti-war radical George McGovern in 1968) from running away with the nomination. The Democrats understand their constituency is given to flights of radical fancy, and don’t want too much democracy in picking its nominees. They are convinced now that a Sanders nomination would be a disaster for the rest of the party, with senators, governors, and members of the House of Representatives down ticket suffering.  In addition, they know where party funds come from. Sanders may be able to raise small contributions for his campaign, but senatorial and congressional candidates do not have that luxury. They need the fat cats that the party feigns hostility toward but always accommodates. 

Dr. Krauthammer thinks that the Democrats have learned from their experience in 1968, where riots at the Chicago convention led to a Republican victory. My position is that if the Democrats were capable of learning from experience, they would be conservatives.