Primary election

In the United States, a primary election is an internal party election where members and party sympathizers theoretically choose candidates to be on a general election ballot. The system is modeled after the Electoral College; the voter is not actually voting for a candidate but a slate of electors or delegates who then advance to county, district, state, and national party conventions to choose party nominees. Primary elections were a progressive reform intended to let the people decide on party nominees for general election candidates, versus the old-fashioned method of party bosses in smoke-filled rooms selecting them.

Technically, some states hold primary ballot elections while others bring the advanced level of delegate selection down to the precinct level and are known as caucuses. Caucuses are a direct and personal method of selecting delegates, any voting age citizen can be nominated or nominate themselves as candidate for delegate to the upcoming local party convention and is voted upon right then and there. Primaries and caucuses are regulated by state governments, although the actual delegate selection rules are made by the parties and may differ in the same state.

In practice, balloting and caucuses function largely identically, except that most caucuses don't allow absentee voting. In discussions it is common to lump primary elections and caucuses together under the term "primaries". While national party committees issue guidelines on how state parties should conduct their nominating process, state parties have leeway in setting procedures based upon state law and traditions.

There are several types of primary. In a closed primary, only active party registrants can vote for a party's candidate. In an open primary, anyone can cast a vote to select a particular party's nominee. Open and closed primaries can be either binding or non-binding. A binding primary binds the delegates to the voters' choice. A non–binding primary is a “beauty contest” or a public opinion survey that party delegates are free to ignore.



American and British systems contrasted
Unlike the British system for picking candidates for the position of head of government, the present day primaries generally by-pass party bosses (with the exception of Superdelegates) in favor of voter input. In Britain, candidates for Prime Minister are chosen by a party caucus of sitting Members of Parliament; in the United States they are chosen through the primary, caucus, and convention system. British parties have adopted an American-style televised convention system in recent decades replete with all the pomp and circumstance afforded American presidential nominees. The Democratic party's Superdelegates somewhat mirror the British system where members elected to the House of Commons have an automatic role to play in choosing a nominee for the country's Chief Executive. The primary system was originally designed because of American's distrust of party leaders, but with modern registration requirements by party, organized party leadership has effectively regained control of the nomination process.

Suggestions for a national primary
It has been suggested that a single national presidential primary would be better than the current state-by-state system. With states holding primaries on different days over the course of months, voters with later primaries feel excluded as many candidates have dropped out by that point. An understanding of what the primary process is sheds some light on the inherent difficulties of a federal, national primary.

Primaries are private, party elections held in public buildings and voting places conducted by party officials. Unlike a general election, where votes are tabulated by the County Clerk and certified by the Secretary of State, the parties themselves oversee the election and results. It is, after all, not a vote for a specific candidate, rather a vote for a party delegate to represent the voter at a nominating convention. Super Tuesday as of now is the closest thing to a national primary. The McGovern-Fraser Commission (see below) after the 1968 Democratic Convention fiasco considered a national primary but dismissed the idea. Rep. Donald Fraser of Minnesota who co-chaired the Commission remained opposed. Minnesota is a caucus state, and Fraser liked the idea of citizen involvement. In a precinct caucus, people meet for hours and discuss candidates and issues before a vote is taken. Unlike polling stations in a general election, candidates and their campaigns can be very much involved on-site where there is much electioneering going on. Unlike a ballot election, many voters show up at a caucus not predisposed to any candidate, idea, or issue and are willing to listen and be persuaded by arguments before casting a vote.

Fundamentally, the people of the United States do not, nor ever have, elected the President. The states do. Given that the parties themselves function under different rules of delegate selection, and the 50 states (plus territories) have different ways of conducting elections, the states are unlikely to give up the limited power they have.

The movement toward Saturday and early voting, which some states do not have, complicates things further. Polling places in small towns and rural areas often traditionally are staffed with volunteers on election day, and an advance voting period which would demand unpaid volunteers donate three weeks of their time rather than a single day, and the cost, may be unfair compared to larger populated, more affluent states and municipalities.

Ultimately, if such a thing as a national primary existed, candidates would have to focus on large states in play, and smaller states like Iowa or New Hampshire would feel forgotten, left out, and neglected, particularly given the added cost burden of early voting, and all factors into how the primary system evolved. The staggered process now over a 90-day window gives enough people around the country enough time to see and hear a candidate up close during the primary season. But he/she is not running for your vote, he/she is running for your delegate's vote.

Binding vs non-binding
In a binding primary, the decision of the voters is binding on the delegates selected to represent their choice at the national convention.

A non-binding primary is not really an election at all in the common legal sense of the word. Nor do the "participants" have the rights of voters. Rather than "voters casting a ballot", "participants express a presidential preference" which is non-binding on the delegates who are eventually selected in closed party caucuses. "Participants' preference" are merely advisory. It is no more than a convoluted public opinion survey for party insiders that requires "voter" registration and held to a certain extent at public expense.

Crossover voting
According to FairVote ,

The same phenomenon however, can occur in a closed primary as well. But a little duplicity is often involved.

Shenanigans
Open primaries can lend themselves to abuse. Supporters of unchallenged incumbents are free to "cross over" and vote for the weakest, most fringe lunatic appearing on the ballot on the other side; this is called "raiding" in political science. This results in eliminating a popular or serious challenger, and having an embarrassing idiot represent the opposition in a general election. To defeat outside disruption of a party's selection process, some state party organizations allow unbound delegates: delegates who are not bound to reflect the will of the people who voted in a party election. Open primary laws are generally sold to the public as a means to overcome voter apathy and encourage non-aligned independents to participate.

A closed primary has a party registration requirement which is not necessarily a deterrent to partisan shenanigans. A long-term popular incumbent may typically have no primary challenger for years or even decades. Party loyalists and operatives therefore have no need to register in their home party - a general election does not require any voter to be identified by party. Partisan loyalists are free to register on the opposing party rolls to sow disruption and participate in the selection of a weak opponent for a general election. And these sophisticated party activists deem it their civic duty to influence the outcome, rather than throw away a vote on their own primary candidate running unopposed.

Crossover registration and voting can happen at every level: city council, mayor, county commissioner, and on up. This stuff is always the subject of legal challenges, hence hybrids have evolved as the result of lawsuits and legislative compromise: semi-closed, semi-open, blanket, and top two. Needless to say, the system is still evolving.

Proportional allocation vs winner-take-all
Under rules for presidential nominating conventions in recent years, Democrats use proportional allocation of elected delegates and Republicans use both proportional and winner-take-all primaries depending on the state. There are drawbacks to both methods.

Proportional allocation awards elected delegates according to the percentage of the vote for non-Superdelegates. If Candidate A receives 60% and Candidate B gets 40%, the Candidate A's net gain is only 20% of the elected delegates and lessens a state's overall impact at the national convention (40% of the losers cancel out 40% of the winners in the same party). While this method appears "democratic", it is further diluted by unelected "Superdelegates", which constitute about one-sixth of convention delegates and exercise veto power over the people's choice. This system seems unproblematic in a narrow field of only two candidates where it's a certainty one will receive a majority.

One criticism of the proportional representation method is that it keeps losers in the field long past their "sell by" date, such as Jesse Jackson in 1984, Hillary Clinton in 2008, or Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Winner-take-all harkens back to how the vast majority of states allocate electors to the Electoral College and provisions of the Twelfth Amendment. In this scenario, it's not uncommon for a victor in a three-way contest with a of 35% to take all the delegates while the losers with 33% and 32% respectively receive nothing. Though it seems unfair to runners-up, a state's overall standing at a national convention is strengthened. Some state parties have a ‘winner-take-more’ or ‘winner-take-most’ rule, based upon the counter-reform movement of the 1980s of awarding ‘bonus delegates’ to a candidate who carries a majority in a Congressional district. A plurality in a district would simply divvy up the minimum number allocated to each district.

Alternatively to a three-way split in primary elections below the office of president, some states have a top-two runoff primary, giving crossover voters a second shot at knocking off their prime target.

Nominating conventions
A caucus is the procedure by which a local party officially chooses the person they will support in an upcoming election.

Delegates selected in primary elections advance to county conventions (in caucus states, caucuses at the precinct level select delegates to the county convention). All these advanced levels use the caucus method. A county convention then selects delegates to the district convention. A district convention selects delegates to the state convention; the state convention selects delegates to a national convention.

Presidential nominating conventions can be either opened or closed. At a closed convention, which has been the norm in the television age, the issue has been decided before the delegates arrive, the nominee is assured a First Ballot victory, and the convention is staged as a pre-General Election pep rally. First Ballot wins have been considered crucial since 1952 and the television age as a display of party unity. The party which displays disunity, like the GOP in 1964, 1976, 1992 and Democrats in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, usually looses. Open conventions can be quite messy and divisive, evoking hard feelings and lingering resentments.

Some history
The caucus method is as old as the Republic. In olden days, prior to the, the spoils system was predominant. The precinct captain led precinct delegates who organized the local "ground game" and served as election judges to stuff the ballot box for their candidate. : the precinct captain was rewarded with a job as local Postmaster, and delegates got postal clerk positions. In modern times, at the federal level, entry-level spots like Congressional intern or staffer can be handed out.

At the local level, a mayor could award a top delegate whip or organizer with the job of Police Chief, and loyal delegates as beat cops to carry out the party platform or harass opponents. The spoils system was rife with corruption and cronyism. When voters rebelled and elected the opposition, everyone in the lost their government job. Teddy Roosevelt's rise to national prominence as a progressive reformer began with implementing civil service reform and ending the system in the New York City Police Department, and later as governor by implementing a state level civil service system. The movement toward primary elections began as a rage against the political machine. , who introduced the first primary election laws in the country as Governor of Wisconsin wanted to abolish closed caucuses and conventions completely, which he said were "prostituted to the service of corrupt organization." Wisconsin’s form of primary, the direct and open primary, which allocated delegates according to a voter’s presidential preference choice and would not deny anyone access to the ballot box, became the model for the nation.

Warren Harding, the proverbial "smoke-filled room" candidate, entered the 1920 GOP convention with 7% of the delegates in a field of 12 and accumulated the requisite number on the 10th ballot. The 1924 Democratic Convention still holds the record for stalemate and indecision with 103 ballots. The Democrats eliminated the two-thirds nominating rule in 1936 because it produced seven multi-ballot conventions in the previous 100 years. The unknown Wendell Wilkie in 1940 was anointed sacrificial lamb on the 10th ballot to run against the popular President Franklin Roosevelt, beating out several prominent GOP national figures such as Thomas Dewey, Robert Taft, Harold Stassen, Arthur Vandenberg and Herbert Hoover. And in 1952, Dwight Eisenhower, whom Democrats claimed Jesus Christ couldn't beat, was nominated amidst accusations of "delegate stealing".

After the reform movement of the 1970s and counter-reform movement of the early 1980s, in some states a voters choice became a “nonbinding advisory presidential preference” that “shall not be considered a step in the delegate selection process”. In other words, a return to the closed caucus system after people expressed a "preference" in a non-binding “beauty contest”.

Fitting conventions to TV
The television age ushered in a string of "closed conventions" where the party's dirty linen is hidden behind the backstairs. No convention in either party has gone beyond the first ballot since 1952, although there have been some pre-balloting platform, rules, credential committee and floor fights. A First Ballot win has been considered crucial as a display of unity. The party with disunity such as the GOP in 1964, 1976 & 1992 or the Democrats in 1968, 1972, 1980 & 1984, usually looses.

After the chaos of the, where Hubert Humphrey did not appear on any primary ballot but took the nomination amid protests and riots, did the Democratic party attempt to reform its nomination process. Most states used closed caucuses and state conventions controlled by insiders and “party regulars” to select national delegates. In the aftermath of the disaster, Humphrey agreed to a reform commission and appointed one of his lieutenants to the.

Sen., a leading member, wanted to "open up" the process of delegate selection and strip figures like Chicago Mayor of their ability to select delegates for the upcoming 1972 convention. Television and media became more empowered in a shift away from party bosses toward activists and voters during the rapid expansion of primary contests the commission brought about. Before the commission only 15 states used the primary method; by 1992 nearly 40 did. Dark horses such as McGovern and Jimmy Carter, who lacked the traditional connections to party bosses, took advantage of the new system.

As McGovern basically wrote the rules for 1972, he of course triumphed on the first ballot, but his victory was followed by a lopsided loss to Richard Nixon in the general election.

So powerful was the leadership vacuum left by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and disappointment with Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey and George McGovern, in 1976 Jimmy Carter ran second to "Uncommitted” in the Iowa caucuses and a follow-up win of 29% to 23% in New Hampshire. But the media made such a fuss about the “victor” throughout the expanded primary schedule Carter rode the media attention momentum all the way to the White House.

The last challenges to the closed convention
The last challenges to the "primaries decide the nominee; the Convention is only a rubber stamp" paradigm came in 1976, 1980, and 1984 convention cycles.

Reagan challenged the incumbent Gerald Ford in 1976 over discredited New Deal-era economic theories, like wage and price controls which Nixon used and Ford supported. Already holding the key California and Texas delegations, Reagan openly courted the unbound Pennsylvania delegation promising to put liberal RINO Sen. Richard Schweiker on the ticket, but the idea failed.

In 1980 Sen. Ted Kennedy, whose brother was argued that events can change between the primary and the convention, and that delegates should not be bound. The lingering Iran Hostage Crisis and an ailing economy were dragging down Carter's approval ratings. Kennedy wanted an open convention and to unbind delegates pledged to Carter.

In 1984 entered the convention 40 delegates shy but secured the nomination with Superdelegates, a contingent of unelected party insiders he helped write into the rules two years earlier. Superdelegates include sitting and former elected officials who can bypass regular rules governing delegate selection to avoid a grassroots backlash and still enjoy a position of power, prestige, and privilege.

Reform and counter-reform attempts
In 2009 the respected, a leftist think tank, published a book entitled, Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, by Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, eds. (See link below). The editors made these salutary points:

What reforms the Republicans have instituted have followed the pattern laid out by Democrats, but not always.

McGovern-Fraser Commission
McGovern was critical of the insider establishment’s way of choosing a nominee and wanted to switch over to primaries. Donald Fraser was a lieutenant in the Humphrey & Mondale Democratic Farmer-Labor (DFL) machine which dominated Minnesota where caucuses are popular. So a compromise was sought. The general feeling was that party insiders such as Mayor Daley and Southern Democrat bosses controlled too much power and through state party caucuses and conventions were able to impose their candidates on a national convention.

The commission recommended bringing more youth, women, and minorities into the delegate selection process and the party apparatus which then stacked the deck in favor of McGovern with New Left activists in 1972. It also recommended parties use their influence in State Legislatures to push for a more open process, which in many states meant abandoning the local caucus and using direct primary ballot elections. The McGovern-Fraser Commission (known as the "reform movement") required state parties to develop written rules and post uniform statewide notification of the date, time, and locations of precinct caucus meetings or party primary elections. There was a common practice in some Southern states, Mississippi for example, all-white local party bosses held meetings in obscure locations so that black majorities in a county or district were unaware of the time and place of a vital party election event. Although many provisions brought about by the commission were undone in the early 1980s, several key provisions have remained, and impacted the Republican party’s rules as well. Prior to McGovern-Fraser, several states had no written guidelines governing party conventions, caucuses, and the delegate selection process at each level, and were based mostly on local tradition, which often meant cronyism and the boss’s rule.

Another issue the commission dealt with was so-called “front-loading” the process in the newly expanded primary election schedule. Traditionally a candidate mapped a strategy as to which primaries they would enter, not so much to win delegates, rather an important test to prove viability to party bosses controlling large delegations in other states. John Kennedy’s West Virginia win was intended to prove Kennedy’s Catholicism was not an impediment in a predominantly Protestant state. Under the new system, a candidate needed to start early and compete in all primaries and garner free media attention.

Under McGovern-Fraser, new blood could ride the fast-track to party power. Among them were, Bill Clinton, and Hillary Clinton. This group later rejected New Left activism in favor of a more corporatist money chasing model, calling themselves ".

Despite McGovern’s colossal electoral defeat in 1972 and ostracism from the party establishment, McGovern’s legacy as a reformer in the selection and nominating process is secure with an enduring affect on both parties.

Mikulski Commission
After the 1972 election, Congresswoman was asked to chair a commission to review and make recommendations on how effective the new rules were. A Gallup Poll at the time revealed a staggering 33% of Democrats and 57% of blue-collar workers voted for Nixon. According to CNN, the commission

The Mikulski Commission went further than McGovern-Fraser, proposing to bind rules on state parties which would restrict delegate selection in primaries or caucuses to "Democratic voters only who publicly declare their party preference and have that preference publicly recorded" (Rule 2A). This required a party registration process before being able to vote in a Democratic primary. The new rule put pressure on parties to close their primaries to outside participation and brought about "same-day registration" in states with open primaries mandated by state law. The DNC incorporated these recommendations into the Delegate Selection Rules for the 1976 Convention. A temporary exemption where state legislatures had no party identification requirement to participate in a primary election was included. Opponents and dissenters felt this new rule violated the integrity of the secret ballot at public polling stations.

Wikipedia summarizes the imposition the Mikulski Commission placed upon voters and the destruction of the American tradition of the secret ballot thusly:

In other words, a voter who wished to vote for a Democrat for President and a Republican for Senate, would be denied that right.

Winograd Commission
In 1975 the Democratic party asked Morley Winograd of the Michigan Democratic party to chair yet another commission that was particularly concerned about crossover voting. The commission focused on Wisconsin's unique direct open primary which had a considerable body of law behind it since inception in 1905, and was the model the McGovern-Fraser reforms used to expand primaries to 25 states. The commission sought to limit participation in the candidate selection process by outlawing open primaries it felt interfered with the national party’s associational rights.

As a result of the commission, the Democratic National Party sued the State of Wisconsin over a 1949 law which required that party delegates pledge to vote at their conventions in accord with open primary results. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned a ruling Wisconsin Democrats won over the National Democratic party in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Wisconsin Democrats were forced to abandon their 80 year old direct primary election because it conflicted with the national party's 14th Amendment associational rights – the requirement participants in a primary make a public declaration of affiliation as revised by the Mikulski and Winograd Commissions. State party bosses had to amend the rules for the 1984 primary to make the people’s vote a non-binding "beauty contest". A “presidential primary election” became a “presidential preference primary”, and a “voter” became a “participant” who expressed a non-binding “presidential preference” rather than a vote. National delegates were again selected in closed caucuses, the same system that existed before the LaFollette reforms.

Hunt Commission
After Ted Kennedy's challenge and President Carter's loss, Democrats met again for the fourth time in twelve years to re-write nominating and convention rules. Anticipating a two-way contest in 1984 between Sen. Kennedy and former Vice President Mondale, the original point of contention was over bound delegates. Sen. Kennedy wanted to loosen the rules, while the Mondale machine wanted a candidate to go so far as being able to replace a "disloyal delegate".

The Mondale machine, supported by Chairman Jim Hunt and labor leaders, more importantly wanted to do something about outsiders and New Left “extremists” they felt had taken over the party. They wanted to do away with portions of the McGovern-Fraser compromise that had frozen elected government office holders out of the nomination process and paved the way for an "insurgent candidate". The new rules the Democratic National Committee (DNC) adopted didn't just allow or encourage incumbents to return, it guaranteed elected officials seats outside the regular delegate selection process. The Kennedy faction wanted to pare down the number of reserved seats from 30% (roughly 800) of all delegates to 14%. , who was to manage Michael Dukakis' 1988 presidential campaign strenuously objected to the plan, and derisively coined the term "super-delegate", whom she claimed would disproportionately be white males based upon the formula. Nevertheless, the idea became rule, and from its initial inception has only been expanded upon since. The "Old Democrats" had retaken power with a vengeance.

The Hunt Commission (also known as the "counter-reform movement") scrapped the proportional allocation rules from the 1970s in favor of winner-take-all which had the unintended affect in 1984 of allowing Gary Hart, a challenger for whom the rules were not written, to rack up big delegate wins in late primary states.

When Sen. Kennedy decided not to run in 1984, two insurgent candidates appeared, McGovern's 1972 "New Democrat" campaign manager Sen. Gary Hart, and Jesse Jackson who was to be the first African-American to win states in a major party primary election for president. But the rules were written for a two-way contest between establishment insiders, not the three-way slugfest between uppity baby boomers, blacks, and the party Old Guard it came to be.

Modern era


Talk of an open or "brokered" convention emerged again in the 2016 cycle, this time on both sides, the "Stop Trump" movement among conservatives on the GOP side and the stacked deck of Superdelegates for Clinton in states Bernie Sanders won on the Democratic side.

Conventions are less about issues and ideas and more about people and career paths. Issues are treated as marketing strategies which need a consensus for use in local races. National conventions in the television age have become entertainment venues and a display of party unity where internal differences are closed for debate. Open or "contested" conventions hold to Bismarck's axiom about politicking, "making law is like making sausage, if you don't like how it's done, don't watch."

Bound vs unbound delegates
Bound delegates elected in a Presidential nominating contest are committed by party rules to reflect the will of the voters in the snapshot poll conducted during primaries and caucuses. Unbound delegates are empowered to use their own judgment as a representative of the people who voted in a party election -- with the exception of the “unpledged” Superdelegate who can vote anyway they please based upon what they feel is in the best interests of the party, or to a candidate they personally are bound after accepting campaign contributions from the candidate.

In the Democrat's current proportional allocation system, all elected delegates (84% of the total) are "pledged" (note, not "bound") to the candidate they are allocated to. The unelected Superdelegates, who constitute 16% of the total, are not bound.

In a three-way contest, such as the Democrats experienced in 1984 it would be possible no candidate would have a majority (50% + 1) on the first round. Unbound delegates are the only ones who can break the deadlock. In an open convention if we were ever to see one again, the rules would allow bound delegates to be unbound on successive ballots. Machine politics again come into play with great pressure put upon delegations to present the entire slate for maximum leverage to one or other candidate whom party bosses favor. There is more at stake than just delivering a delegation to a candidate. In certain key "toss up" or "in play" states, an enthused and united party organization hopes to deliver the entire state in the General Election, where the perks and incentives get higher. The General Election is a winner-take-all scenario.

At-large and Superdelegates
Republican party rules allow for 3 unelected At-Large voting delegates from all the states and territories, 168 in number. These are high ranking state party apparatchiks. They do not represent a district, they represent the state party as a whole.

The Democratic party likewise has 719 unelected Superdelegates, current and former office holders, donors, and big shots. The issue is controversial. There are pros and cons to this system.


 * Pros


 * Reward for high office seekers to have influence and impact at the national level.


 * Assist high level office holders in fundraising to maintain incumbency.


 * Disallows outsiders and "insurgent candidates" from hijacking the presidential nominating process.


 * A built in “stabilizer” against mob rule and the emotional excesses of the people.


 * Cons


 * Elitist, non-democratic, and undemocratic in nature on the face of it.


 * Makes a rebellion by grassroots activists who feel neglected or betrayed difficult.


 * Insures the survival and control of an establishment political class.


 * Potential path for overt corruption to influence the political process

Republican At-Large party chairpersons function as a whip to carry the message from state party donors and bigwigs whom the state party favors. Democratic Superdelegates perform this same function for themselves, their donors, and as party trustees. Both have the ability to use persuasion, incentives, and perks to influence unbound (or "unpledged" among Democrats, if any) delegates. As the saying goes, "Buying a government official is illegal, buying a party delegate is not."

On balance, it's not likely the Democrats will repeal the system given its success. No Democrat was elected to two terms since Franklin Roosevelt before the new rule. Since the Superdelegates, Democrats have twice elected 2 term presidents. What's more likely are minor tweaks for PR purposes given the negative publicity. Meanwhile, the Republicans again will be contemplating their own system as it looks at how the Democrats found a way to hold in check and defeat an "insurgent candidate" from hijacking the nomination, such as Donald Trump, who defies the party establishment and the traditional ideological principles the party stands for, which is the justification and model used to create Superdelegates.

1984 primaries and convention
In 1984 at the convention. In a General Election, 26 states would be enough to win the Presidency under the 12th Amendment in the event of an Electoral deadlock. Walter Mondale won 17 states and is said to have amassed about 1600 delegates. Jesse Jackson, the first African-American to win states in a major party primary, questioned the disparity between his vote total and delegate count, but even the New Left turned New Democrat, Gary Hart, echoed the DNC in poo-poo'ing Jackson's complaint. By convention time Hart was beating President Reagan by 10 points in national polls, but Mondale won nomination by capturing virtually all the Superdelegates. Even at this late date more than 30 years later it is hard to ascertain just exactly how many Superdelegate votes there were at this cooked convention. Multiple original sources put the figure between 550 and 800; The Nation magazine says "roughly 700" and Salon says 550. Wikipedia is silent on the matter. Whatever the result, it is patently clear the Democratic establishment was not going to let anyone other than Walter Mondale win the nomination after Sen. Kennedy forfeited.

One state, Wisconsin according to the "official" surviving record, voted twice in primaries and caucuses under the shameful antics Mondale's DNC machine perpetrated. Wisconsin had experience with primary elections for 80 years, but more than half the states in the nation had only 12 years after the McGovern-Fraser reforms to learn about the closed door shananigans that can occur in a primary election -- such as the ever changing nature of rules year to year, or being misled by state party officials, and not informed you were voting in a non-binding primary. Voter’s franchise has been effectively usurped by party insiders and Superdelegates.

Under the rules then, Superdelegates were not supposed to "commit" to a candidate until the convention. Hart says he and his wife personally spoke with all of them to ask for their support, but virtually all were committed to Mondale for 2 years already.

After the Mondale-Hart debacle, another player who ran McGovern's Texas campaign, Bill Clinton, helped organize the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). By 1992 the DLC had taken over the Democratic National Committee, but it failed to reform Mondale's rules of special privileges for party insiders. The DLC, made up originally of New Leftists, as "New Democrats" followed the view of old guard Democrats that the party had been hijacked by extremists, and the new Superdelegate structure could be used by a new generation of insiders to keep control. But the New Democrats went a step further: they sold out their leftist idealism for corporate greed.

2008 primaries and convention
Hillary Clinton who touted her role as a hands-on operator during the White House years, was at his side when Clinton raised mandatory sentencing guidelines which disproportionately sent Blacks to prison, giving the United States the highest incarceration rate in the world. In 2008, the "inevitable" Hillary Clinton found herself facing an African-American challenger who parlayed every dime he made as a top Democratic fundraiser since his ascent as keynote speaker in 2004, to outbid Hillary's donations to Superdelegate's for their support.

President Bill Clinton made a special visit to the ailing Sen. Ted Kennedy to ask his blessing on his wife's candidacy. Kennedy's endorsement, as heir to the New Deal and Kennedy legacies, leader of the civil rights and liberal tradition as well as access to the New England Democratic donor base, was vital. Clinton said Obama would have been "carrying our bags and getting us coffee" a few years earlier. Kennedy was so offended by Clinton's racist remark, he backed off and endorsed Obama.

Hillary Clinton's campaign team began spreading Islamophobic rumors that Obama was a Muslim schooled in a madrassa as a child in Indonesia.

While it looked like an open convention might have happened again, ultimately Hillary Clinton conceded than Obama at the primary ballot boxes. Progressives were onto the DLC's bait-and-switch tactics, advertising liberalism to voters while feeding at the trough of its Wall Street donors.

2016 primaries and convention
In Bernie Sanders' 25 years in Washington caucusing with the Democrats, he never once served as a Superdelegate -- not until he registered as a Democrat to seek the party's presidential nomination a few months earlier. Although he had voted for party leaders and was awarded preferential committee assignments, his absence as a Superdelegate earned him very little, if anything, from his Congressional colleagues for decades of loyalty on votes and bills. Their support overwhelmingly went to a one-term Senator, multi-millionaire, and effective fundraiser who swamped the delegates with cash donations for their own campaigns.

In New York, state law dictated a closed primary where voters had to publicly declare party affiliation. 5.3 million registered Democrats could vote for Sanders or Hillary Clinton and 2.6 million Republicans could vote for Donald Trump, John Kasich or Ted Cruz. But nearly 3 million non-affiliated independents and other party members were denied access and shut out of the process.

Regional coalitions
The choice of a Vice Presidential candidate historically has been based upon coalitions of state parties using a regional strategy for "balance", although in recent decades there have been instances of a movement away from this approach in place of using more widespread demographic or other factors. We will focus on the more illuminating regional party coalition approach first.

North - South coalitions
The first and more obvious regional coalition is the historical New England liberals with Southern Democrats replicated many times in many ways (winners in green, losers in brown): Variations of this pattern are Midwestern liberals with Southern Democrats:
 * 1932 - Franklin Roosevelt (New York)/John Nance Garner (Texas)
 * 1936 - Franklin Roosevelt (New York)/John Nance Garner (Texas)
 * 1960 - John Kennedy (Massachusetts)/Lyndon Johnson (Texas)
 * 1988 - Michael Dukakis (Massachusetts)/Lloyd Bentsen (Texas)
 * 2000 - Al Gore (Tennessee)/Joe Lieberman (Connecticut)
 * 2004 - John Kerry (Massachusetts)/John Edwards (North Carolina)
 * 1952 - Adlai Stevenson (Illinois)/John Sparkman (Alabama)
 * 1956 - Adlai Stevenson (Illinois)/Estes Kefauver (Tennessee)
 * 1964 - Lyndon Johnson (Texas)/Hubert Humphrey (Minnesota)
 * 1976 - Jimmy Carter (Georgia)/Walter Mondale (Minnesota)
 * 1980 - Jimmy Carter (Georgia)/Walter Mondale (Minnesota)
 * 2016 - Hillary Clinton (Illinois)/Tim Kaine (Virginia)

East - West coalitions
Republicans have used more East - West coalitions (Note: The General Election success of the GOP in Ike, Nixon & Reagan's two terms, and Papa Bush's first term were all predicated on carrying California & Texas - 1/3 of all electoral votes; when Clinton won California in 1992, that was the end of a 40 year strategy. In 2016, Texas Senator Ted Cruz took the unusual step of naming Carly Fiorina of California as his VP choice 6 weeks ahead of the California primary in an attempt to re-build the CA-TX alliance)
 * 1948 - Thomas Dewey (New York)/Earl Warren (California)
 * 1952 - Dwight Eisenhower (Pennsylvania)/Richard Nixon (California)
 * 1956 - Dwight Eisenhower (Pennsylvania)/Richard Nixon (California)
 * 1960 - Richard Nixon (California)/Henry Cabot Lodge (Massachusetts)
 * 1964 - Barry Goldwater (Arizona)/Bill Miller (New York)
 * 1968 - Richard Nixon (California)/Spiro Agnew (Maryland)
 * 1972 - Richard Nixon (California)/Spiro Agnew (Maryland)
 * 1980 - Ronald Reagan (California)/George H.W. Bush (Connecticut)
 * 1984 - Ronald Reagan (California)/George H.W. Bush (Connecticut)

Northern tier Yankee states
Unbalanced regional coalitions (basically Northern tier Yankee states, also known as Free Soil states in the pre-Civil war era), have a poor record:
 * 1972 - George McGovern (Northern plains)/Sargent Shriver (East)
 * 1976 - Gerald Ford (Midwest)/Bob Dole (Central plains)
 * 1984 - Walter Mondale (Midwest)/Geraldine Ferraro (East)
 * 1992 - Papa Bush (East)/Dan Quayle (Midwest)
 * 1996 - Bob Dole (Central plains)/Jack Kemp (East)
 * 2012 - Mitt Romney (East)/Paul Ryan (Midwest)
 * 2016 - Donald Trump (East)/Mike "Disco inferno" Pence (Midwest)

Demographics and other
A recent trend has been to ignore regional balance and focus on a wider demographic popular vote, or balance a ticket with a foreign policy guru, regardless of how many Electoral votes a running mate brings to the table. Ferraro and Palin were the first women from each party to run on a national ticket. Dan Quayle, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore represented "generational change", the first candidates born in the post-1945 World War II era. Obama was something of a novelty candidate representative of a demographic group that superficially is a fraction of women and baby boomers and won anyway on an unbalanced regional ticket. Cheney and Biden were intended to make up for their bosses foreign policy inexperience. One more aside on the choice of a VP. It has become increasingly the custom to defer to a party's nominee to have first choice, however no hard and fast rule mandates this. In the case of an outsider, the choice can be dictated to the nominee. Richard Nixon was imposed on Dwight Eisenhower by party bosses and brokers. Eisenhower was an outsider who made no party affiliation known til after his retirement from the military. Eisenhower never held elective office nor had familiarity with internal party mechanics, and was only too happy to defer the decision to others.
 * 1984 - Walter Mondale (Midwest)/Geraldine Ferraro (East)
 * 1988 - Papa Bush (East)/Dan Quayle (Midwest)
 * 1992 - Bill Clinton (South)/Al Gore (South)
 * 1996 - Bill Clinton (South)/Al Gore (South)
 * 2000 - George W. Bush (Southwest)/Dick Cheney (Mountain west)
 * 2004 - George W. Bush (Southwest)/Dick Cheney (Mountain west)
 * 2008 - John McCain (West)/Sarah Palin (Far Northwest)
 * 2008 - Barack Obama (Midwest)/Joe Biden (East)
 * 2012 - Barack Obama (Midwest)/Joe Biden (East)

Backstair deals
Backstair deal cutting happens all the time at all levels, both leading up to a convention and at a convention itself. A popular insurgent challenger against an establishment choice can be bought off or urged to stand-down and wait their turn til next time in exchange for certain advantages. At the presidential level we've seen this in the cases of McGovern in 1968 & '72; Reagan in 1976 & '80; the Ted Kennedy & Mondale contest from 1980 to 1982 which never fully materialized; Gary Hart from 1984 to 1987 until he had a "misstep through a personal indiscretion". The nomination rotated back from the Minnesota machine to the other half of the Northern tier New Deal coalition, the Massachusetts machine. Susan Estrich, a dissenter on the DNC panel opposed to Superdelegates on the grounds they amounted to sex discrimination, was thrown a bone with the honorary distinction of being the first woman to manage a major party presidential candidate machine in 1988. Other deals were John McCain in 2000 & '08; Mitt Romney in 2008 & '12; Hillary Clinton in 2008 & '16, or possibly Ted Cruz after 2016.

Campaign machines and warchests
The majority of delegates at a national convention typically are active in a candidate's campaign machine, specifically "down ballot" candidates. Money is the mother's milk of politics. All candidates must attract donors and build a warchest for the continuing election cycle. Some candidates are lucky, mostly incumbents in so-called "safe seats" who attract big donors more than they need. These "unspent funds" can be used to build a machine - donated to other candidate's campaign organizations to bind loyalty.

For example, a popular candidate for Governor may need $5 million to run a statewide election. He/she raises $8 million in a campaign warchest. The candidate can then make significant contributions of the unspent balance to State House and Senate candidates, essentially buying the legislature he needs to pass his program.

In the case of unelected Superdelegates who hold public office, records show they tend to be recipients of large donations from Presidential candidates seeking nomination.