The super delegate system is one key reason why

[spooky3]

we Dems are not in the horrible position in which the GOP finds itself, with BOTH leading candidates' having no chance of winning the general.

Super delegates can use their best judgment to prevent a Trump or Cruz from getting the nomination.

I'm glad we have it.

[Iliyah]

1. Unlike the other effed-up party, Dems tend to be more into reality.

SD would never go against the will of majority of the pledged delegates. Although it did hurt my heart that HRC lost to Pres O (who I supported) I realized the system worked. This time it will work for HRC whom I fully support in 2016!

[IamMab]

2. I can understand the argument that SDs are not "democratic."

But the Party is a semi-private organization. If anyone from outside can come in and take over our Party, we could lose it completely.

Isn't that pretty much what happened to the Republican brand? How did the "Party of Lincoln" become the "Party of Trump?" No rules in place to prevent outside takeover, and that's exactly what happened.

The members of the Democratic Party have the right to choose their own nominee, AND the right to arrange how they go about it. California Democratic Party v Jones: "A single election in which the party nominee is selected by nonparty members could be enough to destroy the party."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Democratic_Party_v._Jones

In this day and age, the proper term for super-delegates would be "ratf***er insurance."

[displacedtexan]

4. Your last sentence is pure gold!

I was in high school in '68 and college in '72. I do not, under any circumstances, want to relive those election nightmares.

[Cha]

10. Those are the rules though.. that's what they knew going into it. And, Tad Devine has a

hand in setting up those SDs .. so they can go protest him.

"In this day and age, the proper term for super-delegates would be "ratf***er insurance."

And, no ******** allowed!

Hillary had to deal with this in 2008.. and she learned. Now BS has to deal with it.

[yallerdawg]

3. Scalia got one thing right.

"A single election in which the party nominee is selected by nonparty members could be enough to destroy the party."

We don't want this!

[Skid Rogue]

6. Imagine that lone blue state Vermont....

and all those red states going for Trump.

Maybe it wouldn't be that bad, but I'm not willing to take the risk.

[yallerdawg]

8. This country is ready for a socialist revolution?

I don't think so!

[LiberalFighter]

5. The automatic delegates is a safeguard against outsiders or bad choices.

Against the likes of George Wallace, Ralph Nader, John Edwards, and even Bernie Sanders. Lumping Sanders and Nader together into the same category.

[spooky3]

7. I don't want to be smug, but one thing I'm enjoying is

the prospect of how many zillions of Citizens United $ have been wasted so far and are yet to be wasted, by GOP sympathizers, on this year's election process.

I am glad that our side will select the best possible candidate this year, someone who is prepared to take on the worst.

Until the Citizens United - facilitated corruption in the system can be reduced, I'm taking a little solace in that that.

[Cha]

9. Repubs don't have Super Dels? Brawaaaaaa