I'll admit it, I was naive to the workings of super delegates prior to this primary season. But now that I've learned about them, I just don't see why they are needed or frankly, why anyone considers the concept of super delegates to be fair in in way. If someone out there thinks they are a good thing and offer a fair representation for the voters could you please explain your position to me?

...isn't credible, not in theory or past practice.

I see them as is something less sexy or sinister than spoilers or primary power brokers. They're really just a way to have elected legislators involved and active in the convention process. Also, there's some expected electioneering from some of them, but it's a far cry from the notions going around that they're acting as kingmakers.

Voters and their votes matter, and that the DNC should fear that more than maintaining the facade of "exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists."

Please HRC and her supporters, please continue to go against the will of the voters, then let's see how things play out for ya...

winner of a primary or caucus of that state, HRC would still have a big lead with them (not counting) the ones who have already committed prior to the primary elections. HRC to date has won majority of the big haul delegates of the states.

For the GOP tampering with the Democratic Party's primary election which they have done in the past months is in no way helping BS, but helping their own Republican Party's interest.