Minnesota superdelegate says the current system must be scrapped

Superdelegates hold a unique position to help a party nominate a presidential candidate and each is free to vote for whomever they think is the best option for their party.

Unlike Republican superdelegates, Democratic superdelegates are not bound to support the candidate that won the state they represent.

This election season at least one Minnesota superdelegate thinks the entire system should be tossed.

“I'm getting lots of mail about this, lots of questions,” smiles Minnesota democratic superdelegate Javier Morillo.

“[I’m] probably getting between 5 to 10 [messages] a day.”

Morillo is a democratic national committee member and a Hillary Clinton supporter, but thinks the superdelgate system is outdated. 

“I do not support the superdelegate system, I think we should get rid of it because every four to eight years we have the same debate, this same fear that superdelegates are going to decide the nominee.”

In 2008, voters worried superdelegates would give Clinton the nomination over now President Barack Obama.

“It turned out not to be a contested convention at all. Those are extremely rare in the modern era,” Morillo reminds us.

Unlikely as they are, a contested convention is how the superdelegate system came to be.

“Superdelegates emerged out of the 1968 democratic convention. It was a very divided convention,” says political analyst, Blois Olson.

The system was developed as a way for democratic party leaders to guide voters in the case of candidates who couldn't hold their own against republicans in the general election.

Yet if on the off chance it’s a toss-up between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, “I wouldn't overturn the will of the majority of elected delegates,” assures Morillo who for now plans not to attend this year’s Democratic National Convention should the race run that closely.

Although, as a superdelegate, Morillo would have the right to vote any way he saw fit.

If the contest is close heading into the convention, his voice could ring louder in deciding the nominee than he feels comfortable with.

“They're ultimately the biggest power brokers in this process and as we know giving up power is tough, especially for people in politics,” nodded Olson.