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

[JCanete]

39. That clarification of how most of these supers got their power, that they were once elected to

office, is not in question. I'm not okay with a vote cast before my lifetime affecting whether or not my vote counts in the next election. I don't ever want my vote, along with 10,000 others, invalidated by one person's disagreement with the will of the democratic voters.

I have not once suggested that the 2016 election was decided by superdelegates and 2016 is not the reason I want this change.

Votes change their mind but they get to cast one vote. Unless we're going to have a second vote where voters reenter that process and then by virtue of their will allow superdelegates to vote differently than the will of democratic voters, then Superdelegates should not get to "change the mind" of the party.

I have no idea what you mean by they "can't flip it." Yes, they can theoretically flip the popular vote.

What does "their candidate doesn't do well" mean? At what point is that decided? Who decides it? The supers apparently?

There should simply be a condition in which if the leading candidate drops out the runner-up get the nomination. Then you dont' need supers to step in for that. I see no likelihood of a democratic Presidential candidate suddenly going crazy. I've seen the argument that supers are used for candidates like Edwards who become disgraced, but again, that should simply be a function of that candidate removing himself from the ticket and the replacement runner-up automatically being chosen.