The Republicans wish they had the Democratic Party’s nominating rules.

We have heard much lately about the alleged lack of democracy in the Democratic Party presidential selection rules, particularly about the role of super delegates. There are legitimate grounds for complaint. However peering over the fence at the Republican side of the wall gives us an idea of just how lucky Democrats are to have the rules they do. The Democrats have a strictly proportional system, allocating delegates in every contest with a 15% threshold. 15% of all delegates are also unpledged (so-called super delegates) people whose loyalty is to the party as an institution rather than to a particular candidate (although they can endorse). These super delegates get their standing outside of direction from any primary or caucus voting process. Clearly super delegates have an incentive to support the voters’ choice because a party that lacks democratic legitimacy would face difficult challenges in winning elections. And parties want nothing more than to win elections. Yet the super delegate process also can prove salutary in the event one candidate may exploit some of the weakness of the selection system. Delegates awarded in caucuses, for example, lack a certain democratic legitimacy because participation is so much lower than in primaries. Super delegates provide a possibility for correction. Proportionality also enhances the value of individual votes since it prevents unfair outcomes in which winning by a single vote in a state can get you all the delegates. Thus the Democratic system is a relatively fair approximation of both what the voters want and what the party wants.

However, as we head toward South Carolina on the Republican side, things look much different. Donald Trump, who in last night’s debate broke in a profound way with Republican orthodoxy on Iraq, looks poised to win in South Carolina. Even If we surmise that Trump’s performance hurt him and that he will drop down to 30% of the vote, the rules in South Carolina could mean that he will still win all of the South Carolina delegates. There are many states in the Republican process that either entirely reward winning or reward winning to a degree far greater than mere proportionality. Thus candidate Trump, who averages between 30% and 40% of the votes in a number of states, could get a far higher percentage in delegates. On the Democratic side a candidate would need 58% of pledged delegates to win without gaining support of any super delegates, thus negating the possibility of a candidate like Trump sweeping through. No such safeguard exists on the Republican side. Trump, with 35% nationally would wind up with roughly 30% of delegates under the Democratic rules. Trump, with 35% on the Republican side, could end up over 50%. While Republican leaders may soon try and push candidates out of the race, until and unless the field narrows dramatically, those hanging around permit Trump to accumulate large numbers of delegates with smaller fractions of the vote Moreover, Trump has virtually no endorsements from the type of people who are super delegates on the Democratic side (officeholders and party officials). Because they don’t get a vote on the Republican side, Trump is in a far better position than most observers realize. Although the roller coaster may not follow the path he meant, John Kasich may have been right when he urged Republicans to buckle their seat belts.