Tad Devine, in a New York Times op-ed, gives us this oh-so encouraging piece of super delegate history:
Many party leaders felt that the delegates would actually be more representative of all Democratic voters if we had more elected officials on the convention floor to offset the more liberal impulses of party activists.
I don’t know much about how super delegates originally came about, so Devine’s piece is informative. But what should be clear – and is clear looking at the nature of the super delegate system – is that it is a mechanism that ensures some level of check outside the democratic process by the party elites. Whether it bears out this way or not, in the 1980s this was something that reduced the strength of liberal activists.
Again, I’m sure I’ll get to read more about super delegates in the coming weeks and months, but I hope those defending the autonomy of these delegates to do whatever they want with no clear directive, recall this passage from Devine and recognize that the mechanism exists to prevent the Democratic Party from becoming more liberal than its elite members want it to be.
Hold Fast 
The rational is kind of dumb, in my opinion. Supposedly, the party bigwigs were really freaked out by the chaos at the 1968 Dem convention. Then after the disaster of the nomination of George McGovern in 1972 the party established Superdelegates. McGovern won only one state, and had only 37.5 percent of the popular vote. Then in 1976, Jimmy Carter was a seen as dark-horse candidate with minimal national experience. My parents and cousins who were active in NJ politics-growing up I’ve met 4 of our ex-governors, had no idea who Carter was until he made his run.
The purpose of the super-delegate system is to act as a check on ideologically extreme, or inexperienced candidates. (Our big winning move for the center.) And to give more power to people who have a vested interested in the direction of the Democratic party : elected leaders, and former leaders. (As if they need more power.) The primary and caucus voters do not have to be active members of the party. The super-delegate system is called a safety-value, however it seems as crooked and undemocratic as the old smoke-filled room days. It makes me very nervous. However, if they do the wrong thing here…the backlash is going to be horrible. Hopefully, the Supers have some sense of self-preservation-they aren’t letting Lieberman vote.
LikeLike