Sign in to comment!

Your World Cavuto

Democrats' new superdelegate dilemma

This is a rush transcript from "Your World with Neil Cavuto," March 30, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

CHARLES PAYNE, GUEST HOST: Reaction from South -- former South Carolina Governor Jim Hodges. He's supporting Hillary Clinton. And Nomi Konst, she's something Bernie Sanders.

Governor, a lot of heat coming on the Democratic Party about these superdelegates who seem to be establishment creatures, if you will, that dominate the process and really thwart the will of the people, but you think it's OK?

JAMES HODGES, FORMER SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR: I do think it's OK, Charles.

Superdelegates have been around a long time. And I think Bernie Sanders has tried to court the superdelegates in states that he's lost or states that are coming up, just like Hillary Clinton is courting superdelegates.

I think it's fair. These are figures of the party who have a vested interest in the outcome. And I think that it's not surprising that superdelegates in New York would support Hillary Clinton. She's a favorite daughter of New York. She served in the Senate from New York for some time.

So, I don't think it's at all surprising. And, frankly, I think the limited number of superdelegates we have, their involvement in the process is actually helpful to us.

PAYNE: But, Nomiki, this is kind of nuts. What happened -- why even vote? Why bother to have the election then if it's already written in stone who is going to win?

NOMIKI KONST, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Totally agree.

In 1981, they set up the superdelegate system. It was part of the Hunt Commission. And what happened was, you had elected officials who felt like they wanted to have more influence in process and be rewarded for their support.

So, they created the superdelegate system. Well, the elected officials first got the superdelegates, then party leaders. Then now you find out that they're lobbyists and donors involved in this superdelegate process. One superdelegate equals 10,000 votes.

So, if the gentleman from South Carolina, former elected here, who might as well be a superdelegate, for all we know, understands this process, it is a mechanism of patronage. Flat out, that is what it is. This is old-school, machine party politics. And the Hunt Commission was created just to block reformers.

PAYNE: Right.

So, Governor Hodges, first of all, are you a superdelegate?

HODGES: No. No, I'm not.

PAYNE: OK.

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: Let me ask just one thing. Are you concerned, though, about the tone where, in American politics on both sides of the aisle, people are frustrated with this sort of weird thing?

Everyone thought one person, one vote, and all these other skewed things that take away grassroots, the voting of the regular folks, you can see a revolt in the Democratic Party not unlike we're seeing in the GOP.

HODGES: Well, it's the same process we had in 2008, and Barack Obama was successful in convincing superdelegates to vote for him.

And that's -- at the end of the day, what's going to happen is, they will make a decision at the convention, after the entire process unfolds.

But let me just say that Hillary Clinton actually is winning the vote, too. She's not only leading with delegates. She's leading with the number of people who have actually voted in primaries here. So, the process, I think, is going to unfold pretty well for her during the course of events during the primaries.

KONST: With all due respect, sir, she's winning the process because she has machine -- a machine apparatus organizing the vote in these states.

Bernie Sanders is running a grassroots campaign. He doesn't have elected officials who have endorsed him two years prior organizing that vote. He doesn't have union leaders who have endorsed him two years prior raising money for her and getting their apparatus machine out to vote. This is a system that was built to block reformers, to stop McGovern and to stop Carter.

PAYNE: Let me just -- let me get with the governor in.

And I will say, if she's getting more votes than him because she's got a better ground game or whatever, that's one thing, but, again, getting back to the idea that there's not a commensurate or direct correlation with these superdelegates. Overwhelmingly, they have gone to Clinton, over 90 percent.

She has not won that much of the popular vote. And therein is the reason people are upset about this, Governor. You understand that?  

HODGES: Well, sure, I understand that.

And, again those were the rules in 2008 as well, and it worked out well for Barack Obama.

KONST: Doesn't mean they're right.

HODGES: But hang on a minute. Let me finish.

Judy what I would say about this process is, when you look at where the votes have been cast where people have voted, she's won that, too. So, there's no reason for the Sanders campaign to complain about that.

PAYNE: All right, Governor.

We're going to -- guys, we're going to have to leave it there. A lot of passion on both sides. We appreciate it.

KONST: Thank you.

PAYNE: And we will definitely bring this up again. You can be sure of that.

HODGES: Thanks.

KONST: Thank you.

Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.