>>> and how only the superdelegates system saved HRC's ass.
>
>Not true- she scored 54.4% of the popular vote, so won even without the superdelegates.

The issue is a bit more involved than that.

Let's go back to February 19th. At that time, you had the Iowa caucus and the New Hamsphire primary. Remember that less than a year before that, HRC held HUGE leads

The Iowa caucus was basically a tie, and Sanders won convincingly in NH. An absolutely horrible start for the presumptive nominee against a self-described socialist.

Here's where the superdelegate count stood the following day:

Hillary Clinton: 451
Bernie Sanders: 19

The DNC was saying all along that purpose of the D “super-delegate” was to acknowledge the popular-vote and pledged-delegate leader. I call "baloney" on that. The major "Freudian slip" award on the true nature of the DNC superdelegate goes to Howard Dean, who made it perfectly clear what the superdelegate system was really all about.

I am not a Sanders fan (though I admire his intensity), and I think he and his supporters have a very legitimate beef. The DNC rigged this heavily in favor of HRC before the first vote was cast. So much so that HRC eventually getting only 54% just goes to show how poor a candidate she really is.