Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) defended the superdelegate system in the Democratic party nominating process in an interview with NBC's Andrea Mitchell on Thursday. Reid said Iowa and New Hampshire have "no diversity." Reid said he asked himself, "how in the world could we have the future of this country be dependent" on these two states?



"The process was totally unfair before -- eight years ago. Eight years ago, I looked at this and I thought, how in the world could we have the future of this country be dependent on Iowa, which is 93% white, and we have New Hampshire which is 97% white, no diversity, no diversity in Iowa. And have the final decision made as to who is going to be the president of the United States based on those two states, it was wrong," Reid said.



Mitchell asked Reid how the superdelegate system is a fair process if Bernie Sanders "clobbered" Clinton in New Hampshire with a 22-point landslide yet they both came out with 15 delegates each due to 6 superdelegates giving their support to Clinton.



"Even though [Bernie Sanders] won the election by a big margin in New Hampshire, the delegates came out even. It was not a good system, it's getting better," Reid said.



Reid's full remarks from MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Reports:





ANDREA MITCHELL, NBC: There are a lot of concerns among people about the role of the super delegates. Here you've got Hillary Clinton getting clobbered in New Hampshire, 22-point landslide by Bernie Sanders, and yet, they divided the delegates 15-15 because she had so many super delegates, so many members of Congress and Senators and the governor of course. Is that a fair process?



SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): Well, the process was totally unfair before -- eight years ago. Eight years ago, I looked at this and I thought, how in the world could we have the future of this country be dependent on Iowa, which is 93% white, and we have New Hampshire which is 97% white, no diversity, no diversity in Iowa. And have the final decision made as to who is going to be the president of the United States based on those two states, it was wrong. We now have Nevada and South Carolina before we get into the rest of the country as to who's chosen where.



This is better, so much better than it was before. So, think what it would be if this campaign didn't go to Nevada and South Carolina. It was just determined by what happened in Iowa, she won, and you just indicated that even though he won the election by a big margin in New Hampshire, the delegates came out even. It was not a good system. It's getting better.