Re: The Real Reason Bernie Sanders Hates Superdelegates or “Superdelegates are anti-democratic by Function”
You seem to be subscribing to myths about the superdelegate system.
Myth #1: The superdelegates can overturn the results of primaries or caucuses.
Reality: The superdelegate system isn’t undemocratic simply because superdelegates are dramatically outnumbered by pledged delegates. In 2016, there were only 712 superdelegates. However, there were nearly 4800 pledged delegates. Superdelegates can’t overturn the results of primary/caucuses — even if they wanted to.
And superdelegates tend to vote for the most popular candidate anyway, confirming the will of the people rather than overturning it. 2008 is a recent example of this. While Hillary Clinton started off with a lead among the superdelegates, many of them quickly defected to Obama when it became clear that he would win more votes in the primaries/caucuses.
Myth #2: Superdelegates somehow have more power than pledged delegates.
Reality: It’s true that superdelegates aren’t elected to their position. And it is also true that they aren’t elected like the pledged delegates, not required to support any candidate, nor bound by the results of state primaries. In plain English: the superdelegates can vote for whomever they want (and change their minds however ever often they want) but they only get one vote.
You probably subscribe to the myths because you do not understand why the DNC has superdelegates in the first place. The superdelegate system was the result of a decade and half of reforms designed to make the DNC presidential nomination process MORE FAIR AND DEMOCRATIC. After the chaotic DNC convention of 1968, the party began transitioning away from state conventions (conventions that gave often corrupt party bosses too much control over the nominating process) and toward state primaries and caucuses. However, “party elites” wanted to have some say-so over who got nominated, too. Hence, the party debuted the superdelegate system in 1984.
The truth of the matter is that the superdelegate system creates a situation where a presidential candidate has to have a broad base of support from “rank and file” Democrats AND the so-called party elites. If the “regular people” in the party line up behind someone but the superdelegates hate that candidate, that candidate cannot win the nomination under party rules. Conversely, if the superdelegates LOVE a candidate that is roundly rejected by the rank and file, that candidate simply cannot secure the nomination. In short, the superdelegate system is a consensus-building tool.
So, no, I would not call out the superdelegates for refusing to support Bernie a second time around. Under party rules, they are allowed to support/withhold support from any candidate. Especially a candidate that got nearly four million fewer votes in the primaries and caucuses.
