You Can Learn Something From A Superdelegate

Prof. K. looks at the democractic primary process and finds more than delicious intra-party wrangling, but a study in republican politics. It's the Federalists v. the anti-Federalists all over again. On the "anti-Federalist" side are those who argue the superdelegates shouldn't "overturn" the results of the caucuses and primaries: .

The votes that really count are those determined by the primaries and caucuses, not those that are earned by virtue of years of public and party service.

But then --and this is the logic of the "Federalist" argument-- why have superdelegates at all, except as a remedy for passions of the moment, and so that party considerations could be taken into account? RTWT. We're promised a part II on "crossover voting," as well.