Changes

==Origins==

==Origins==

{{Cquote|Put aside the caucus and convention. They have been and will continue to be prostituted to the service of corrupt organization. They answer no purpose further than to give respectable form to political robbery. Abolish the caucus and the convention. Go back to the first principles of [[democracy]]; go back to the people. Substitute for both the caucus and the convention a [[primary election]]--held under the [[sanction of law|sanctions of law]] which prevail at the [[general election]]s--where the [[citizen]] may cast his [[vote]] directly to nominate the candidate of the [http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/2014-party-identification-detailed-tables/ party with which he affiliates] and have it canvassed and returned just as he cast it....Then every [[Equality|citizen will share equally]] in the nomination of the candidates of his party and attend primary elections as a privilege as well as a duty. It will no longer be necessary to create an artificial interest in the general election to induce voters to attend. Intelligent, well-considered judgement will be substituted for unthinking enthusiasm, the lamp of [[reason]] for the torchlight.|20px|20px|Bob La Follette}}

{{Cquote|Put aside the caucus and convention. They have been and will continue to be prostituted to the service of corrupt organization. They answer no purpose further than to give respectable form to political robbery. Abolish the caucus and the convention. Go back to the first principles of [[democracy]]; go back to the people. Substitute for both the caucus and the convention a [[primary election]]--held under the [[sanction of law|sanctions of law]] which prevail at the [[general election]]s--where the [[citizen]] may cast his [[vote]] directly to nominate the candidate of the [https://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/2014-party-identification-detailed-tables/ party with which he affiliates] and have it canvassed and returned just as he cast it....Then every [[Equality|citizen will share equally]] in the nomination of the candidates of his party and attend primary elections as a privilege as well as a duty. It will no longer be necessary to create an artificial interest in the general election to induce voters to attend. Intelligent, well-considered judgement will be substituted for unthinking enthusiasm, the lamp of [[reason]] for the torchlight.|20px|20px|Bob La Follette}}

The Superdelegate system was an effort to dis-empower voters after the rapid expansion of primary elections and [[voting rights]] throughout the [[United States]] which the party's [[McGovern-Fraser Commission]] fostered in the 1970s .

The Superdelegate system was an effort to dis-empower voters after the rapid expansion of primary elections and [[voting rights]] throughout the [[United States]] which the party's [[McGovern-Fraser Commission]] fostered in the 1970s .

After [[Ted Kennedy]]'s [[primary]] challenge and [[President Carter]]'s loss to Reagan in 1980, Democrats rewrote their nominating and convention procedures for the fourth time in twelve years<ref>See Broder, below.</ref>. Anticipating a two-way contest in 1984 between Sen. Kennedy and former Vice President [[Walter Mondale]]<ref>Bad blood existed between the Humphrey-Mondale and Kennedy machines going back to [[Hubert Humphrey]]'s 1960 Presidential primary campaign. Humphrey later wrote of the [[Massachusetts liberal|Kennedy machine]], "underneath the beautiful exterior there was an element of ruthlessness and toughness I had trouble either accepting or forgetting."</ref>, the original point of contention between them was over bound delegates which Sen. Kennedy wanted to loosen, while the Mondale machine wanted a candidate to be able to go so far as to replace a "disloyal delegate"<ref>[http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/413%20democratic_party_convention_rule.htm Democratic party convention rule changes]. academic.regis.edu . Delegates must march in lockstep.</ref>.  

After [[Ted Kennedy]]'s [[primary]] challenge and [[President Carter]]'s loss to Reagan in 1980, Democrats rewrote their nominating and convention procedures for the fourth time in twelve years<ref>See Broder, below.</ref>. Anticipating a two-way contest in 1984 between Sen. Kennedy and former Vice President [[Walter Mondale]]<ref>Bad blood existed between the Humphrey-Mondale and Kennedy machines going back to [[Hubert Humphrey]]'s 1960 Presidential primary campaign. Humphrey later wrote of the [[Massachusetts liberal|Kennedy machine]], "underneath the beautiful exterior there was an element of ruthlessness and toughness I had trouble either accepting or forgetting."</ref>, the original point of contention between them was over bound delegates which Sen. Kennedy wanted to loosen, while the Mondale machine wanted a candidate to be able to go so far as to replace a "disloyal delegate"<ref>[http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/413%20democratic_party_convention_rule.htm Democratic party convention rule changes]. academic.regis.edu . Delegates must march in lockstep.</ref>.  

The Mondale machine, supported by Chairman Jim Hunt and union bosses, more importantly wanted to do something about outsiders and [[New Left]] “extremists”<ref>Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, p.7, below.  www.brookings.edu </ref> they felt had taken over the party<ref>[[Jane Fonda]] and [[Tom Hayden]] are interesting case studies; by 1980 Fonda was calling herself a "small 'd' democrat" advocating “industrial policy” and [http://www.janefonda.com/tag/campaign-for-economic-democracy/ “economic democracy”] while Hayden was entering the ranks of the “establishment” electoral process through the California Democratic machine. Fonda’s terminology [https://go.berniesanders.com/page/event/detail/volunteeractivityormeeting/4v4xs remarkably resembles views] espoused by [[Bernie Sanders]], who also began a career in electoral politics outside the Establishment Democratic Party in the early 1980s. Fonda and Hayden became involved in the ‘save the whales’ and [[Greenpeace]] movement. By 1979 after the U.S. withdrawal from South Vietnam, the [[Democide|Cambodian genocide]] in which 2 million persons were murdered was well under way, and a popular reaction against the “anti-establishment” New Left peace movement of the 1960s took hold in the United States. Bumper stickers with slogans such as “nuke the whales” became fashionable.</ref><ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/1981/03/30/arts/jane-fonda-of-the-80-s-mellower-but-still-an-activist.html JANE FONDA OF THE 80'S MELLOWER BUT STILL AN ACTIVIST], By MICHIKO KAKUTANI, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 1981.</ref><ref>See also ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=RbpdkYGh65kC&pg=PA191&lpg=PA191&dq=%22Russia+Iran+Disco+Suck%22&source=bl&ots=ARPrGgswYE&sig=YV0lNWWWR2nyPc4lwg7V4B-tRwo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZxMuXvMPMAhVR5WMKHcElCZcQ6AEINTAF#v=onepage&q=%22Russia%20Iran%20Disco%20Suck%22&f=false Russia Iran Disco Suck]'' for a summary of the popular mood in the late 1970s.</ref>.  The Mondale and Kennedy machines agreed to do away with portions of the McGovern-Fraser Commission (known as the "reform movement") that had striped influence and power from elected government office holders in the nomination process<ref>[https://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/01/15/Democratic-party-rule-makers-recommended.-today-that-delegates-to/3774379918800/ UPI Reporting on the Hunt Commission by ARNOLD SAWISLAK], Jan. 15, 1982.</ref> and paved the way for outsiders and an "insurgent candidate" . The rules the Democratic National Committee (DNC) adopted from Hunt Commission recommendations didn't just allow or encourage incumbents to return, it guaranteed them seats outside the regular [[Democracy|democratic]] selection process. The Kennedy faction wanted to cut the number from about 800 reserved seats in half<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1982/01/17/democrats-and-unintended-consequences/d4741a07-05a2-47b1-bd33-b04458338005/ Democrats and Unintended Consequences], By David S. Broder, ''[[Washington Post]]'', January 17, 1982. </ref>, but over the years the base number of other delegates was expanded to meet the target of about 1-in-6 rather than the 1-in-3 originally proposed.  [http://www.foxnews.com/person/e/susan-estrich.html Susan Estrich], who was to manage Michael Dukakis' 1988 presidential campaign<ref>Estrich and Dukakis are ranking members in the Massachusetts Kennedy machine which tried to resurrect the 1960 alliance and victory with Texas Democrats on the Dukakis/Bentsen ticket.</ref> strenuously objected to the plan, and derisively coined the term "super-delegate", whom she claimed would disproportionately be white males<ref>[https://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/news/news-archive/history-of-superdelegates A History of 'Super-Delegates' in the Democratic Party], Elaine Kamarck, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, 2016.</ref>. Nevertheless, the idea became rule, and the figure of about 800  positions has held<ref>The number varies cycle to cycle based upon the number of Congressional seats, Governorships, and other offices the Democratic party  controls, and when vacancies occur during the 90 day window for selection or at the time the Credentials Committee convenes. Superdelegatges have been likened to the ruling ''[[Nomenklatura]]'' of the Soviet era. </ref>, while the requirements for non-elected office holders chosen outside of the  primary and caucus system has only been expanded<ref>Democratic party convention rule changes, academic.regis.edu , above.</ref>. The "Old Democrats" had retaken power with a vengeance.

The Mondale machine, supported by Chairman Jim Hunt and union bosses, more importantly wanted to do something about outsiders and [[New Left]] “extremists”<ref>Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, p.7, below.  www.brookings.edu </ref> they felt had taken over the party<ref>[[Jane Fonda]] and [[Tom Hayden]] are interesting case studies; by 1980 Fonda was calling herself a "small 'd' democrat" advocating “industrial policy” and [http://www.janefonda.com/tag/campaign-for-economic-democracy/ “economic democracy”] while Hayden was entering the ranks of the “establishment” electoral process through the California Democratic machine. Fonda’s terminology [https://go.berniesanders.com/page/event/detail/volunteeractivityormeeting/4v4xs remarkably resembles views] espoused by [[Bernie Sanders]], who also began a career in electoral politics outside the Establishment Democratic Party in the early 1980s. Fonda and Hayden became involved in the ‘save the whales’ and [[Greenpeace]] movement. By 1979 after the U.S. withdrawal from South Vietnam, the [[Democide|Cambodian genocide]] in which 2 million persons were murdered was well under way, and a popular reaction against the “anti-establishment” New Left peace movement of the 1960s took hold in the United States. Bumper stickers with slogans such as “nuke the whales” became fashionable.</ref><ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1981/03/30/arts/jane-fonda-of-the-80-s-mellower-but-still-an-activist.html JANE FONDA OF THE 80'S MELLOWER BUT STILL AN ACTIVIST], By MICHIKO KAKUTANI, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 1981.</ref><ref>See also ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=RbpdkYGh65kC&pg=PA191&lpg=PA191&dq=%22Russia+Iran+Disco+Suck%22&source=bl&ots=ARPrGgswYE&sig=YV0lNWWWR2nyPc4lwg7V4B-tRwo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZxMuXvMPMAhVR5WMKHcElCZcQ6AEINTAF#v=onepage&q=%22Russia%20Iran%20Disco%20Suck%22&f=false Russia Iran Disco Suck]'' for a summary of the popular mood in the late 1970s.</ref>.  The Mondale and Kennedy machines agreed to do away with portions of the McGovern-Fraser Commission (known as the "reform movement") that had striped influence and power from elected government office holders in the nomination process<ref>[https://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/01/15/Democratic-party-rule-makers-recommended.-today-that-delegates-to/3774379918800/ UPI Reporting on the Hunt Commission by ARNOLD SAWISLAK], Jan. 15, 1982.</ref> and paved the way for outsiders and an "insurgent candidate" . The rules the Democratic National Committee (DNC) adopted from Hunt Commission recommendations didn't just allow or encourage incumbents to return, it guaranteed them seats outside the regular [[Democracy|democratic]] selection process. The Kennedy faction wanted to cut the number from about 800 reserved seats in half<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1982/01/17/democrats-and-unintended-consequences/d4741a07-05a2-47b1-bd33-b04458338005/ Democrats and Unintended Consequences], By David S. Broder, ''[[Washington Post]]'', January 17, 1982. </ref>, but over the years the base number of other delegates was expanded to meet the target of about 1-in-6 rather than the 1-in-3 originally proposed.  [https://www.foxnews.com/person/e/susan-estrich.html Susan Estrich], who was to manage Michael Dukakis' 1988 presidential campaign<ref>Estrich and Dukakis are ranking members in the Massachusetts Kennedy machine which tried to resurrect the 1960 alliance and victory with Texas Democrats on the Dukakis/Bentsen ticket.</ref> strenuously objected to the plan, and derisively coined the term "super-delegate", whom she claimed would disproportionately be white males<ref>[https://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/news/news-archive/history-of-superdelegates A History of 'Super-Delegates' in the Democratic Party], Elaine Kamarck, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, 2016.</ref>. Nevertheless, the idea became rule, and the figure of about 800  positions has held<ref>The number varies cycle to cycle based upon the number of Congressional seats, Governorships, and other offices the Democratic party  controls, and when vacancies occur during the 90 day window for selection or at the time the Credentials Committee convenes. Superdelegatges have been likened to the ruling ''[[Nomenklatura]]'' of the Soviet era. </ref>, while the requirements for non-elected office holders chosen outside of the  primary and caucus system has only been expanded<ref>Democratic party convention rule changes, academic.regis.edu , above.</ref>. The "Old Democrats" had retaken power with a vengeance.

The Hunt Commission (or "counter-reform movement") discarded the proportional allocation rules from the 1970s in favor of winner-take-all. Prior to proportional representation there was the “unit rule”, a delegation had to vote as a unit, now known as “winner-take-all”. McGovern-Fraser scraped the unit rule in favor of [[affirmative action]], or “proportional representation”, rather than actual votes cast. Today’s “unpledged” Superdelegates are party bosses whose cronies, the “pledged delegates”, earn their seats in state machines by working to elect Superdelegates in previous elections. Together they function as a unit, wherein the boss makes a deal to throw his weight behind a candidate -- a re-creation of the 19th century political machine that [[Progressive]] reformers such as Bob La Follette fought to eliminate<ref>La Follette wanted to do away with caucuses and conventions completely, which he said were [http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lhbum&fileName=07510/lhbum07510.db&recNum=226&itemLink=r?ammem/lhbum:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28lhbum07510div10%29%29%23075100227&linkText=1 "prostituted to the service of corrupt organization"] and wanted to rely on the direct open primary so that  "nominations of the party will not be the result of 'compromise' or impulse, or evil design...[but rather] the candidates of the majority, honestly and fairly nominated." [http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/lhbum:@field(DOCID+@lit(lhbum07510)):@@@$REF$ Robert La Follette's Autobiography], pp. 195-200.</ref>.

The Hunt Commission (or "counter-reform movement") discarded the proportional allocation rules from the 1970s in favor of winner-take-all. Prior to proportional representation there was the “unit rule”, a delegation had to vote as a unit, now known as “winner-take-all”. McGovern-Fraser scraped the unit rule in favor of [[affirmative action]], or “proportional representation”, rather than actual votes cast. Today’s “unpledged” Superdelegates are party bosses whose cronies, the “pledged delegates”, earn their seats in state machines by working to elect Superdelegates in previous elections. Together they function as a unit, wherein the boss makes a deal to throw his weight behind a candidate -- a re-creation of the 19th century political machine that [[Progressive]] reformers such as Bob La Follette fought to eliminate<ref>La Follette wanted to do away with caucuses and conventions completely, which he said were [http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lhbum&fileName=07510/lhbum07510.db&recNum=226&itemLink=r?ammem/lhbum:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28lhbum07510div10%29%29%23075100227&linkText=1 "prostituted to the service of corrupt organization"] and wanted to rely on the direct open primary so that  "nominations of the party will not be the result of 'compromise' or impulse, or evil design...[but rather] the candidates of the majority, honestly and fairly nominated." [http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/lhbum:@field(DOCID+@lit(lhbum07510)):@@@$REF$ Robert La Follette's Autobiography], pp. 195-200.</ref>.

The winner-take-all rules had the embarrassing affect in 1984 of allowing an insurgent candidate to rack up big delegate wins in late primary states<ref>Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, Chapter 1 [http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/1/1/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess_chapter.pdf Choosing Presidential Candidates], Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, eds., Brookings Institute, 2009, pp. 4-8. www.brookings.edu . An excellent and timely synopsis.</ref>. So after 1984 the party brought back "proportional allocation"<ref>This had the consequence in Democratically controlled states, after the [[Bush v. Gore|2000 Florida Recount]] and calls to abolish the [[Electoral College]], for party bosses to explain ''why'' winner-take-all is more beneficial to the state and that "proportional allocation" is a "feel-good" measure that has the effect of cancelling out votes within the same party and state.</ref>.

The winner-take-all rules had the embarrassing affect in 1984 of allowing an insurgent candidate to rack up big delegate wins in late primary states<ref>Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, Chapter 1 [http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/1/1/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess_chapter.pdf Choosing Presidential Candidates], Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, eds., Brookings Institute, 2009, pp. 4-8. www.brookings.edu . An excellent and timely synopsis.</ref>. So after 1984 the party brought back "proportional allocation"<ref>This had the consequence in Democratically controlled states, after the [[Bush v. Gore|2000 Florida Recount]] and calls to abolish the [[Electoral College]], for party bosses to explain ''why'' winner-take-all is more beneficial to the state and that "proportional allocation" is a "feel-good" measure that has the effect of cancelling out votes within the same party and state.</ref>.

When Sen. Kennedy decided not to run in 1984, two insurgent candidates did appear, McGovern's 1972 "[[New Democrat]]" campaign manager  Sen. Gary Hart, and [[Jesse Jackson]], who was to be the first [[African-American]] to win states in a major party primary election for president. Susan Estrich's words were prophetic: the good old white boy network, including Hart, shot him down<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/20/us/disparity-between-jackson-s-vote-and-delegate-count-vexes-party.html?pagewanted=all DISPARITY BETWEEN JACKSON'S VOTE AND DELEGATE COUNT VEXES PARTY], By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM, ''New York Times'', May 20, 1984; see also ''New York Times'' on April 24, May 11, and May 24 of 1984 for articles reporting Jackson's complaint</ref>. The rules were written for a two-way contest between establishment insiders--Mondale and Kennedy, not the three-way slugfest between baby boomers, blacks, and the party Old Guard it came to be.

When Sen. Kennedy decided not to run in 1984, two insurgent candidates did appear, McGovern's 1972 "[[New Democrat]]" campaign manager  Sen. Gary Hart, and [[Jesse Jackson]], who was to be the first [[African-American]] to win states in a major party primary election for president. Susan Estrich's words were prophetic: the good old white boy network, including Hart, shot him down<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/20/us/disparity-between-jackson-s-vote-and-delegate-count-vexes-party.html?pagewanted=all DISPARITY BETWEEN JACKSON'S VOTE AND DELEGATE COUNT VEXES PARTY], By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM, ''New York Times'', May 20, 1984; see also ''New York Times'' on April 24, May 11, and May 24 of 1984 for articles reporting Jackson's complaint</ref>. The rules were written for a two-way contest between establishment insiders--Mondale and Kennedy, not the three-way slugfest between baby boomers, blacks, and the party Old Guard it came to be.

==="insurgent candidates"===

==="insurgent candidates"===

The original "insurgent candidate" the Hunt Commission referred indirectly to was George McGovern, whom after his massive Electoral loss in 1972 was seen as anti-[[patriot]]ic for his longstanding opposition to President [[Lyndon Johnson]]'s War which had the effect of dividing the party, and the country, and permanently tarnished Johnson and Vice President [[Hubert Humphrey]]'s<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/opinion/27Perlstein.html?_r=0 America’s Forgotten Liberal], By RICK PERLSTEINMAY, ''New York Times'', May 26, 2011. </ref> [[civil rights]] records, painting these two [[liberal]]s for posterity as "war hawks".

The original "insurgent candidate" the Hunt Commission referred indirectly to was George McGovern, whom after his massive Electoral loss in 1972 was seen as anti-[[patriot]]ic for his longstanding opposition to President [[Lyndon Johnson]]'s War which had the effect of dividing the party, and the country, and permanently tarnished Johnson and Vice President [[Hubert Humphrey]]'s<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/opinion/27Perlstein.html?_r=0 America’s Forgotten Liberal], By RICK PERLSTEINMAY, ''New York Times'', May 26, 2011. </ref> [[civil rights]] records, painting these two [[liberal]]s for posterity as "war hawks".

[[George Wallace]] was considered a particularly unwelcome insurgent, considering he had won [[United_States_presidential_election,_1968#Results|more states and Electors in 1968]] than the  [[United_States_presidential_election,_1972#Results|party's own nominee in 1972]]. Wallace had sown disruption and division within the party in the 1964, 1972, and 1976 election cycles which had conflicted with the party's outreach aims culminating in the [[Voting Rights Act]] of 1965 and the affirmative action quotas of the McGovern-Fraser and [[Mikulski Commission]]s. Many [[Conservative Democrat|Southern Democrat]]s by this time already viewed themselves as ''persona non grata'' and moved to the Republicans, such as Texas Governor and presidential aspirant [[John Connally]], and others.

[[George Wallace]] was considered a particularly unwelcome insurgent, considering he had won [[United_States_presidential_election,_1968#Results|more states and Electors in 1968]] than the  [[United_States_presidential_election,_1972#Results|party's own nominee in 1972]]. Wallace had sown disruption and division within the party in the 1964, 1972, and 1976 election cycles which had conflicted with the party's outreach aims culminating in the [[Voting Rights Act]] of 1965 and the affirmative action quotas of the McGovern-Fraser and [[Mikulski Commission]]s. Many [[Conservative Democrat|Southern Democrat]]s by this time already viewed themselves as ''persona non grata'' and moved to the Republicans, such as Texas Governor and presidential aspirant [[John Connally]], and others.

Sen. [[Gary Hart]] won 26 states and 1164 delegates at the convention<ref>In a General Election, 26 states would be enough to win the Presidency under the 12th Amendment in the event of an Electoral deadlock.</ref>. Walter Mondale won 17 states and is said to have amassed about 1600 delegates. [[Jesse Jackson]], the first African-American to win states in a major party primary, questioned the disparity between his vote total and delegate count, but even the New Left turned New Democrat, Gary Hart, echoed the DNC in poo-poo'ing Jackson's complaint<ref>See above, DISPARITY BETWEEN JACKSON'S VOTE AND DELEGATE COUNT VEXES PARTY, By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM, ''New York Times'', May 20, 1984.</ref>.

Sen. [[Gary Hart]] won 26 states and 1164 delegates at the convention<ref>In a General Election, 26 states would be enough to win the Presidency under the 12th Amendment in the event of an Electoral deadlock.</ref>. Walter Mondale won 17 states and is said to have amassed about 1600 delegates. [[Jesse Jackson]], the first African-American to win states in a major party primary, questioned the disparity between his vote total and delegate count, but even the New Left turned New Democrat, Gary Hart, echoed the DNC in poo-poo'ing Jackson's complaint<ref>See above, DISPARITY BETWEEN JACKSON'S VOTE AND DELEGATE COUNT VEXES PARTY, By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM, ''New York Times'', May 20, 1984.</ref>.

By convention time Hart was beating President Reagan by 10 points in national polls, but Mondale won nomination by capturing virtually all the Superdelegates.  Even at this late date more than 30 years later it is hard to ascertain just exactly how many Superdelegate votes there were at this crooked convention. As of April 2016 Wikipedia's ''1984 Democratic Primaries'' page does not even mention the term "Superdelegate" anywhere.  Multiple original sources put the figure between 550 and 800; ''[[Nation (magazine)|The Nation]]'' magazine says "roughly 700" <ref>[http://www.thenation.com/article/not-so-superdelegates/ Not So Superdelegates], By Ari Berman Editorial, ''The Nation'', January 31, 2008.</ref>; ''[[Salon Media Group|Salon]]'' says 550 <ref>[http://www.salon.com/2015/02/15/exclusive_americas_last_great_convention_mondale_jackson_hart_dish_to_salon_about_wild_1984_dnc/ America’s last great convention: Mondale, Jackson & Hart dish to Salon about wild 1984 DNC], Phil Hirschkorn, ''Salon'', Feb 15, 2015.</ref>. Wikipedia is silent on the matter. Whatever the result, it is patently clear the Democratic establishment was not going to let anyone other than Walter Mondale win the nomination after Sen. Kennedy forfeited<ref>[https://www.princeton.edu/csdp/events/Zaller021102/Zaller.pdf Beating Reform:The Resurgence of Parties in Presidential Nominations, 1980-2000], Marty Cohen , David Karol, Hans Noel, Daniel Zaller, University of California Los Angelas, 9/17/01, p. 14 pdf. www.princeton.edu </ref>.

By convention time Hart was beating President Reagan by 10 points in national polls, but Mondale won nomination by capturing virtually all the Superdelegates.  Even at this late date more than 30 years later it is hard to ascertain just exactly how many Superdelegate votes there were at this crooked convention. As of April 2016 Wikipedia's ''1984 Democratic Primaries'' page does not even mention the term "Superdelegate" anywhere.  Multiple original sources put the figure between 550 and 800; ''[[Nation (magazine)|The Nation]]'' magazine says "roughly 700" <ref>[http://www.thenation.com/article/not-so-superdelegates/ Not So Superdelegates], By Ari Berman Editorial, ''The Nation'', January 31, 2008.</ref>; ''[[Salon Media Group|Salon]]'' says 550 <ref>[https://www.salon.com/2015/02/15/exclusive_americas_last_great_convention_mondale_jackson_hart_dish_to_salon_about_wild_1984_dnc/ America’s last great convention: Mondale, Jackson & Hart dish to Salon about wild 1984 DNC], Phil Hirschkorn, ''Salon'', Feb 15, 2015.</ref>. Wikipedia is silent on the matter. Whatever the result, it is patently clear the Democratic establishment was not going to let anyone other than Walter Mondale win the nomination after Sen. Kennedy forfeited<ref>[https://www.princeton.edu/csdp/events/Zaller021102/Zaller.pdf Beating Reform:The Resurgence of Parties in Presidential Nominations, 1980-2000], Marty Cohen , David Karol, Hans Noel, Daniel Zaller, University of California Los Angelas, 9/17/01, p. 14 pdf. www.princeton.edu </ref>.

One state, Wisconsin is recorded as having voted ''twice'' according to the official surviving record in primaries and caucuses. The official record shows Hart winning a plurality, 44% to Mondale's 41%; four days later in a highly unusual move, the "Wisconsin caucus" delivered a 54% to 29% majority (see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_1984#Results_by_state Wikipedia: results by state]) to Mondale in a winner-take-all closed caucus.  Prior to the convention Wisconsin Democrats sued over the national party's effort to enforce the [[undemocratic]] rules formulated by the [[Winograd Commission (Democratic Party)|Winograd Commission]] targeting an 80 year old body of law standing behind Wisconsin's primary system. The McGovern-Fraser Commission had used Wisconsin's experience and model to expand primaries into dozens of other states. The DNC lost the suit, but appealed to the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] and won a reversal. Wisconsin Democrats were forced to abandon the direct primary election and adopt a closed caucus method of delegate selection. Because the state legislature had not acted yet, "voters" became "participants" and only allowed to express a non-binding "presidential preference”<ref>[http://www.bustle.com/articles/144701-what-is-a-binding-primary-or-caucus-these-distinct-events-require-delegates-to-do-this What Is A Binding Primary Or Caucus?], MORGAN BRINLEE, February 29 2016. bustle.com </ref> rather than a legal "vote" with the sanction of law.<ref>The ruling did not apply to Republicans which were in compliance with state law and national party rules of delegate selection. </ref>. Under the DNC's 14th Amendment associational rights, legal voters in Wisconsin and elsewhere were disenfranchised. The reforms of ''Fighting'' Bob La Follette, founder of the [[Progressive]] movement, were completely undone<ref>See [https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_Party_of_U.S._v._Wisconsin_ex_rel._La_Follette Democratic Party of U.S. v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette], ballotopedia.org  </ref>.

One state, Wisconsin is recorded as having voted ''twice'' according to the official surviving record in primaries and caucuses. The official record shows Hart winning a plurality, 44% to Mondale's 41%; four days later in a highly unusual move, the "Wisconsin caucus" delivered a 54% to 29% majority (see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_1984#Results_by_state Wikipedia: results by state]) to Mondale in a winner-take-all closed caucus.  Prior to the convention Wisconsin Democrats sued over the national party's effort to enforce the [[undemocratic]] rules formulated by the [[Winograd Commission (Democratic Party)|Winograd Commission]] targeting an 80 year old body of law standing behind Wisconsin's primary system. The McGovern-Fraser Commission had used Wisconsin's experience and model to expand primaries into dozens of other states. The DNC lost the suit, but appealed to the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] and won a reversal. Wisconsin Democrats were forced to abandon the direct primary election and adopt a closed caucus method of delegate selection. Because the state legislature had not acted yet, "voters" became "participants" and only allowed to express a non-binding "presidential preference”<ref>[http://www.bustle.com/articles/144701-what-is-a-binding-primary-or-caucus-these-distinct-events-require-delegates-to-do-this What Is A Binding Primary Or Caucus?], MORGAN BRINLEE, February 29 2016. bustle.com </ref> rather than a legal "vote" with the sanction of law.<ref>The ruling did not apply to Republicans which were in compliance with state law and national party rules of delegate selection. </ref>. Under the DNC's 14th Amendment associational rights, legal voters in Wisconsin and elsewhere were disenfranchised. The reforms of ''Fighting'' Bob La Follette, founder of the [[Progressive]] movement, were completely undone<ref>See [https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_Party_of_U.S._v._Wisconsin_ex_rel._La_Follette Democratic Party of U.S. v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette], ballotopedia.org  </ref>.

===Sold to the highest bidder, 2008===

===Sold to the highest bidder, 2008===

Even though [[Hillary Clinton]] won the popular vote at the ballot box<ref>[http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2008&elect=1M 2008 Presidential Democratic Primary Election Results], Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. uselectionatlas.org/ </ref>, [[Barack Obama]] gave more money to the Superdelegates<ref>[http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/02/superdelegate-update/ Superdelegate Update], By Lindsay Renick Mayer, Center For Responsive Politics, February 28, 2008. opensecrets.org </ref>.

Even though [[Hillary Clinton]] won the popular vote at the ballot box<ref>[http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2008&elect=1M 2008 Presidential Democratic Primary Election Results], Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. uselectionatlas.org/ </ref>, [[Barack Obama]] gave more money to the Superdelegates<ref>[https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/02/superdelegate-update/ Superdelegate Update], By Lindsay Renick Mayer, Center For Responsive Politics, February 28, 2008. opensecrets.org </ref>.

===''Deja vu'' all over again, 2016===

===''Deja vu'' all over again, 2016===