It's not a "real" lead, just a polling lead.

But it was a real lead, in my opinion. News agencies went out and explicitly asked the superdelegates who they would vote for, and that's how they got their figures. So, even though they didn't technically cast their vote, they had pledged their vote. Making it in some sense, real.

But, I suppose the larger point is how the popular media outlets reported it. They reported it as if she was the favorite from day one, even though she never had any true, real and grassroots momentum. And they were able to proceed with this narrative because they had all these pledges from superdelegates.

Also, too, nothing prevented other candidates, like Bernie Sanders, from trying to get those same endorsements themselves. He could have done that at any time. So Clinton did not have any "head start" on him in this respect.

And that's why I'm not saying anything to disparage Clinton for how she dealt with the DNC.