Does it Have to Come Down to Super Delegates?

There was a time when the task of convention was to determine a nominee. Today, politicians, pundits and the media wipe their brows in fear that the Democratic nomination may not be determined until Denver. Many voters are learning about super delegates for the first time, and are outraged that in a supposed government for the people, by the people and of the people, an elite few hold the power to ultimately determine who will be the next President.

The truth is, it wouldn't be the first time. In 1984, super delegates put Walter Mondale over the top. Of course, it was considered fair by the general consensus because he held a slight lead in won delegates. This time around, neither Obama or Hillary will have the magic number, 2025, without super delegates. Even though there are 1191 delegates still up for grabs in the primaries ahead, because of the way delegates are split based on percentages in the Democratic party, it just won't happen. Sure, Obama could technically do it, if he won by 60% in every single primary left. But how likely is that to happen, especially in places like Ohio, West Virginia, and Indiana, or even Texas. He may be breaking into her voter base, but Texas, even if it does go to him, will be much closer than that.

If we look at the upcoming primaries realistically, chances are good that the delegates will be split somewhere down the middle. At the end of the last primary on June 7, the total would look something like this: Obama 1911 delegates, Hillary 1841. It's a stretch to 2025 for either one of them. And even if Michigan and Florida were to be given back part or all of their delegates, it simply wouldn't be enough to put Hillary over the top. Enter the super delegates.

Super delegates actually became a part of the Democratic party structure in 1980, but the idea started getting jostled about as early as 1968. Party officials believed that the party didn't have enough say in selecting their candidate, so they came up with a system that allowed party big wigs extra votes. Democratic office holders in all the states, and higher ups in Democratic campaigns and the party itself earned the title of super delegates. Simply put, they don't have to answer to anyone. Regardless of how their states voted, super delegates can support whomever they want, within their own party. They can, however, be stripped of their status if they endorse someone from the other party. Just ask Joe Lieberman, who lost his super delegate power because he backed John McCain.

Of the approximate 800 super delegates, about half of them are still undecided in the Hillary-Obama battle. But take heart, Hillary supporters. Even if Hillary falls short in the won delegates, she could still get the nomination. If just half of the remaining super delegates are swayed to her side, her delegate count reaches 2041, enough to cinch the nomination. And while Obama has seen an increase in his super delegate support, Hillary still has the advantage. Not that a scenario such as this would earn the Democratic Party brownie points. Should the super delegates back the second-place contestant, whether it be Obama or Hillary, Nancy Pelosi may want to find a new profession. Even high-ranking Democratic officials have threatened to drop out if the supers don't support the voice of the people. Legally, though, they could do just that.

Regardless of who comes out on top in this historic Democratic race, super delegates will likely take the blame. Already they are feeling the heat not only from the Clinton and Obama campaigns, but from voters as well. Sites across the web, such as demconwatch.blogspot.com list the super delegates from each state, whether they have committed to a candidate yet, and if so, which one. Hillary Clinton's Myspace page has sent out bulletins requesting that voters email Nancy Pelosi, asking her to place her super delegate vote behind Hillary. And Obama, feeling the pressure of a vote determined by the old guard he so eloquently puts down, is asking that the rules be changed.

If Democrats learn one thing out of this election, it should be this: politics aren't fair.