Superdelegates offsetting the results of primaries is unconstitutional IMHO

[Samantha]

95. I know of at least one Court that would disagree with your premise

Facts. The Defendant is a very successful Texas political organization that operated a lot like a political party. The Defendant’s members are all white. The Defendant Association held pre-primaries and for more than fifty years, the Defendant’s county -wide candidates had invariably been nominated in the Democratic primaries and elected to office. The President of the Defendant Association admitted that the purpose of the party was to exclude blacks from voting and to escape the Fifteenth Amendment’s command that everyone could vote, regardless of race. The Defendant argues that its association is a private club because it was not governed by state laws and did not utilize state elective machinery or funds. Moreover, the Defendant argued that the Fifteenth Amendment constitutional challenge does not apply to their “self-governing voluntary club.” The Plaintiffs, a group of Negro voters (Plaintiffs), brought a class action to determine their rights under the Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution.

Issue. Does a private, successful, political association have to follow the Fifteenth Amendment?

Held. Yes, a private organizations primary election constitutes a public function.

Discussion. For a state to allow what the Defendant wants is to defeat the purpose of the Fifteenth Amendment. It is immaterial that the State does not control the Defendant Association because their candidates are always successful. The Defendant’s primary is the only part of the election that determines who governs the county, which strips blacks of their right to vote for elected officials if they cannot join.

http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-chemerinsky/the-structure-of-the-constitutions-protection-of-civil-rights-and-civil-liberties/terry-v-adams/2/

Citation: 345 U.S. 461, 73 S. Ct. 809, 97 L. Ed. 1152, 1953 U.S.

I do realize there are small political parties that choose a candidate, and rather than entering under the umbrella of either the Democatic Party or Republican Party, it chooses to be self-contained, gathering signatures to put candidates on ballots or perhaps encouraging voters write-in their candidate. These parties have been classified as private entities and often have no problems with their process until and unless voters' civil rights be violated under The U.S. Constitution, a Federal law or a state constitutional provision.

This being said, I would like to volunteer my own personal opinion. Elections should not be charades.When you say primary voters have no constitutional rights to directly select their nominees, most ordinary people believe when they go to the polls and select a name of a candidate to receive their vote, they are participating in directly selecting that candidate. If they follow the process a little further, they learn when the votes are tallied, the political affiliation of the committed electors are chosen by the results of the votes.

If people wholesale realized that commitment only was good through the first balloting round at a political convention, they would be furious. Political deals and maneuvers like brokered conventions are a sham. This has got to change.

And for superdelegates to be waived into the process as representatives of corporate entities or wealthy donors is appalling beyond belief.

Yes, the political parties do run the conventions but if it becomes clear that the will of the people is superseded at these events in favor of corporate preferences and the uber-wealthy, members from that party will exit en masse, and that very large party will become nothing but a fly on the wall.

I am done with this.

Sam