Now that the Iowa Caucus is in the record books, contrary to Trump’s demand for a redo, the respected party brokers are eager to weed out the hanger-on’s. Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Rand Paul and Martin O’Malley are gone. The GOP Party, started in 1854, is circling the wagons behind their establishment pick, Marco Rubio and the Democratic National Committee, founded in 1848, will do everything necessary to see that Hillary Clinton gets her chance to steal their selection. All of this chicanery is being practiced by two private political power hungry organizations. Proprietary rules and internal arbitration is the hallmark of party control and discipline, which ensures that the final outcome goes as the money interests deem.

So you do not believe it is that cut and dry? Listen to the admission from the Council on Foreign Relations. You cannot get anymore establishment than this mouthpiece for the elite ruling cabal. Here is how the party natural selection process is supposed to operate. The Role of Delegates in the U.S. Presidential Nominating Process provides this account.

Who are the delegates?

Delegates are individuals chosen to represent their states at their party conventions prior to a presidential election. The rules for selecting delegates, which are dictated by the parties, can be dizzying—the guidelines vary not only by party, but by state, and sometimes by congressional district. A party might grant additional delegates as a reward if a state has a recent history of supporting that party, for example. In other cases, delegates might simply be allocated to a state based on the percentage of votes that state is granted in the Electoral College.

Who are the delegates?

Delegates are often party activists, local political leaders, or early supporters of a given candidate, says Anthony Corrado, government professor at Maine’s Colby College. Presidential campaigns often encourage “a member of a county board or a local state representative or a state senator” to run for their slate of delegates, says Corrado, “because they help to bring their own political constituencies or they’re a recognizable name.” Delegates can also include members of a campaign’s steering committee. In some cases, delegates are long-time active members of their local party organization, and running as a delegate is “one of the rewards for their service to the party over the years,” says Corrado.

What is a superdelegate?

The Democratic Party has superdelegates, which include elected officials, like members of Congress, and party officials. At the Democratic convention, superdelegates account for twenty percent of overall delegates and are “uncommitted and are not bound in any fashion” to any one candidate, says Ornstein. In other words, they can throw their support to whomever they want at the convention.

The source of the following comes from Policy Mic. Everything You Need to Know About How Primaries and Caucuses Actually Work, provides additional details, while claiming that “superdelegates” go with the flow.

On the Democratic side, the winning nominee must secure a majority of the roughly 4,800 delegates who will be at the Democratic National Convention in July. Most those delegates will be chosen by the primary and caucus process, in which delegates who are pledged to candidates are awarded based on the results in each state, assuming candidates clear a certain threshold of support. Several hundred of the votes at the national convention come from so-called “superdelegates” — party officials and elected members of the party, such as members of Congress, who are free to throw their support behind the candidate of their choosing. Their candidate endorsements typically serve as a useful barometer for what the party establishment thinks of the electability of candidates. While they can choose whom they support freely, historically they’ve not shown any signs of defying voters’ clear choices. For the Republicans, the presidential candidate needs more than half of about 2,500 delegates at stake. Before March 15, delegates are awarded proportionally, meaning a candidate can lose the election but still win delegates. In the nomination contests on March 15 and afterwards, many states are winner-take-all, meaning the statewide winner receives all of the state’s delegates. The winner-take-all dynamic will likely accelerate the process by which a clear victor emerges.

Based on Federal Election Commission data released electronically on Sunday, January 31, 2016, the Center for Responsive Politics discloses the open secrets of this primary cycle. Spending records are being set. The final outcome suggests that the public will get to vote between the chosen candidates that big money approves.

Much of the public is still entranced in a fantasy that their vote actually counts. Many of these “true believers” would prefer the direct election of President by the majority of a popular vote. Democracy in its most vulgar and manipulated arrangement has a primitive appeal to the part time citizen, but to dedicated defenders of the American Revolution, the notion of abolishing the Electoral College guarantees the final demise of the Republic. For the professional party hacks, the restricted system protects the political machine.

Some might say this fact alone warrants a different method of governance. Well, who could deny that the present oligarchy cries out to be replaced if not banished from our shores?

The late and great colleague in cynicism, Bob Taft provided the historic alternative to the present system of top down authoritarianism. The Inherent Autonomy essay, The TUN – a true representative council provides the answer.

“An original thinker named Bob Taft from Wyoming popularizes the TUN form of representation. The condensed version is very simple. Based upon the Biblical teaching of Exodus 18:21 (several variants provided) the King James Bible states: “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place [such] over them, [to be] rulers of thousands, [and] rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens”. Originally, the TUN is a group of ten families. The fifty could be a clan, consisting of a group of 50 TUNS. Likewise, the hundreds could be a tribe of a 100 clans. The thousand would be the next group of tribes, a nation. The actual size of each unit or the number of subsets needed to include the population is secondary to the principle that is put forth. Namely, the primary group or the TUN, determines the selection process. The delegate from this TUN selects the single representative for the next larger group. This progression continues to each level of representation for the entire populace. Historically, Mr. Taft cites the experience of using the TUN form of selection by the Saxons prior to the Norman Conquest. He also tracks that, “The ancient system by the way also existed under the Iroquois Constitution (or Algonquin Confederation) which directly influenced the drafting of our 1777 Articles of Confederation”.

Before the naysayers jump all over this extraordinary yet simple method for a limited but responsible citizen participation, one needs to reflect upon the purpose here within; namely, to eradicate the role and power of special interests, party bosses and Plutocrats. A secondary benefit is to eliminate the need for political parties themselves.

Since the Founding Fathers originated a confederation of states without the curse of an organized structure of party corruption, the only hope for a wounded nation is to replace the farce that goes on from the very day after the last Presidential selection.

Others will say this substitution is impossible; the elite establishment will never give up their power. No question, looking to elect a few good men to office (obviously Hildebeast does not qualify) to shepherd this transfer back to legitimate populist authority, will not happen.

The crowds gathering around Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are a genuine grassroots rebellion. While Trump’s groupies may share many of the sympathies of the Buchanan Brigades, and Sanders’ Socialists may be smokers of joints, both understand that the current system is the playpen of Wall Street, Corporatists, Military-Industrial-Security-Complex and Globalist.

Chris Keniston the 2016 presidential nominee of the Veterans Party of America writes the following:

“American taxpayers help pay for the political conventions held every four years by both the Republican and Democratic national committees. The taxpayer subsidies for political conventions come through the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. The account is funded by taxpayers who choose to contribute $3 to it by checking a box on the federal income tax returns. About 33 million taxpayers contribute to the fund every year, according to the Federal Election Commission. In 2012, Taxpayers directly contributed $18,248,300 million to the Republican and Democratic national committees, or a total of $36.5 million. Congress also set aside $50 million for security at each of the party conventions, for a total of $100 million. The total cost to taxpayers of the two national party conventions in 2012 exceeded $136 million.”

Stuck on Stupid was never clearer. A voluntary contribution to finance both Parties’ road show is harebrained. And any hope that elected officials will cut the taxpayer money cord is simply insane. A true political revolution is required to ever achieve the promise or possibility of Liberty.

SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.