In February of 2016, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National Committee, was asked by CNN's Jake Tapper, "What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it's all rigged?" Schultz's response was, "Super delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists." This clarification was hailed by Clinton supporters as a wise policy to maintain steady, experienced governance, and derided by Sanders supporters as the establishment thwarting the will of the people.


20% of Dem delegates are "super delegates" party insiders not bound by the popular vote in their state. This craziness started after the 1968 elections, that must not have gone the way party leaders liked. So how does this impact a "grass route" guy like the wacko from Vermont? He crushed Hillary by 22%, yet may loose the state.

Since you only need 50.1% of the total delegates, locking up 80% of super delegates leaves her only needing about 35% of the popular vote in Dem primaries.

the Vermont senator won the Granite State primary in a rout over Hillary Clinton, earning 15 delegates to Clinton's 9. But New Hampshire has eight additional "super delegates," and six of them back Clinton. The other two haven't declared a preference. So at the moment, Sanders and Clinton both have 15 total delegates, and it's possible that the former secretary of state could ultimately pull ahead — in a state she lost, 60 percent to 38 percent.


The republicans have different rules, and shouldn't impact the nominee. roughly 6% are "un pledged delegates" which generally follow the popular vote of the state. The Democrats will catch shit over this, but will likely shift only a few super delegate votes, not enough to give Sanders the win in a close race.