The Democratic primary contest persists. Moving forward like some poor headless chicken, it has enough momentum to keep jerking forward but not nearly enough sense to pick a direction and stick to it. Senator Barack Obama of Illinois wins two primaries, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York wins one, and very little changes. With her surprisingly strong nine-point win in Pennsylvania last week, Senator Clinton accomplished relatively little, winning by too much for Senator Obama to effectively claim a win and by too little to noticeably move the race in her direction. With only a handful of states and territories left and with vitriol and animosity casting increasing doubt on Democratic chances in November, it has become abundantly clear that the Democratic Party needs a nominee to rally behind sooner rather than later. But a candidate will not manifest as his or her party's leader without the help of that powerful and surprisingly ambiguous group known as superdelegates. The superdelegates, for the good of the party, must act to field a nominee as soon as possible.

With just what powers have these superdelegates been gifted? For that matter, what is a superdelegate? There was no such political animal until 1982, when a commission headed by North Carolina governor Jim Hunt created the category. Superdelegates are, generally, party leaders, including state party chairs, senators, members of the House of Representatives, governors, members of the Democratic National Committee and so forth. Their votes may be cast at whim at the party's convention for any candidate of their choosing. The great power of the superdelegate comes into play this year because neither Senator Obama nor Senator Clinton will be able to attain the 2,025 pledged delegates necessary to win outright and will thus need the extra votes provided by the superdelegates.

What, then, is a superdelegate to do? This race has essentially come down to their discretion; it requires an ending, but the motivations behind the votes that move towards that ending are varied and unpredictable, depending on the superdelegate in question. Should these superdelegates vote according to the will of the people?

For that matter, what is the will of the people, in this case-the overall "winner" of their state, the winner of their district or the national popular vote? Should superdelegates vote, instead, with their consciences, pledging themselves to the candidate they think best suited for the presidency, most deserving of the office or most likely to beat their opponent in November? Wouldn't such a vote be in conflict with the democratic values so near and dear to the hearts of many Americans?

Not so fast. The superdelegates are the product of many years of Democratic Party nominating consternation, such as the 1980 convention, at which Senator Edward Kennedy posed a serious threat to the nomination of sitting president Jimmy Carter. One of the biggest motivations for the creation of superdelegates was to return some level of influence to party leaders. It would be assumed that these leaders could exercise their good judgment and unify around a single candidate, firmly securing for that candidate the nomination and avoiding the riots, brokered conventions and confusion of old.

During this election cycle, however, it seems that the support of superdelegates is as sought-after as that of regular voters. Senators Obama and Clinton are running neck-and-neck in terms of the number of superdelegates each has been able to woo, leaving neither with a clear advantage. The longer they remain without a clear leader, the longer Senator John McCain of Arizona, the Republican nominee, can remain calmly unopposed.

The Democratic Party needs a nominee soon, plain and simple, or that nominee will appear to be running at the head of a weak and divided party that has no clear plan for the nation.

As high-minded as the ideal of voting as one's constituents have voted might be, the superdelegates, come the end of the last primary in June, must swallow their pride and support the candidate with the most legitimate pledged delegates. Anything less will appear to millions of Democratic voters to be an abandonment of their will. By uniting behind the winner of the most pledged delegates, the superdelegates can decisively put an end to any uncertainty and field a nominee with the support necessary to win in November.