Insiders: How Much Power Should They Have?

Both Republicans and Democrats face questions regarding how much power party insiders should wield.

On the Democratic side, these questions revolve around superdelegates who are able to support any candidate at the convention, regardless of their home state’s primary result. On the Republican side, the argument centers on delegate selection — the long series of state-, county- and district-level caucuses and meetings that, in most states, choose the flesh-and-blood delegates to the convention.

Critics of the superdelegate system or the byzantine GOP delegate selection process typically argue that these processes are undemocratic. Superdelegates can vote for whomever they want, regardless of the popular vote, at the convention, and in most Republican contests the actual delegates’ names don’t appear on the primary ballot. Additionally, not all of the delegates are completely in touch with the party rank-and-file. Many state-level Republicans favored Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who proved to be a far-right factional candidate. And super-delegates are supporting Clinton at a much higher rate than primary voters have. So the critics make a good point — there are undemocratic parts of both parties’ systems.

But there are some benefits to having more insider control.