The ignorance of Superdelegates is astounding. We lost 49-1 TWICE in little more than a decade

[LiberalFighter]

35. Personally, I think it is democratic.

Regular delegates are elected at state conventions as determined by the average of the past three presidential general election results for the Democratic Party candidate.

Superdelegates are the elected Democratic members of Congress and other current and past leaders. i.e. Past Presidents, National Party Chairs, Majority or Minority leaders. Mostly after winning elections in their state before going to Congress.

The regular delegates are not elected at a primary election. Those are state delegates going to a state convention that elect the national delegates.

I do disagree that establishment people have an outsized say in the process. If you look at where they live. They live all over the country and they will be influenced by party politics but they are also influenced by local politics. The process does provide a sense of order and understanding that experience provides. Superdelegates comprise less than 15% of all delegates and by themselves cannot change the outcome of the nomination. Sanders would have needed 553 out of the 714 superdelegates to win the nomination without getting the majority of regular delegates.

One of the advantages of superdelegates is that they understand and know the inner workings of the party. That the rest of us don't. Who has a good campaign. Who is raising the necessary funds and applying those funds to expenditures wisely. Who is doing the work and hitting the right targets. Who might run into problems because of past improprieties. Who really has the support and the right message. That rightly influences their support of a candidate. And send a message to others a strong candidate is the right person or send a flag if certain respectable people support someone else other than the perceived winner.

Another thing that people forget is that the primaries last nearly half a year. A lot could happen during that time.