"Twenty-two percent (22%) of Democratic voters nationwide say that Hillary Clinton should drop out of the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination. However, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that an identical number—22%--say that Barack Obama should drop out. A solid majority of Democrats, 62%, aren’t ready for either candidate to leave the race."
This doesn't quite square with the 'we need to call this now and not let it go to the convention because this is hurting the Democrats' viewpoint that is receiving a fair amount of press at this time... Perhaps a case of the Democratic Party apparatus getting cold feet. Apparently they 'do not want the superdelegates deciding the contest', viz statements by Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and others to this effect.
This begs the question of why they created two categories of delegates in the first place (3,253 delegates and 794 "superdelegates). Did they never expect any close contests in the future? Was it not forseeable that a) having one of every five delegates (19.6% to be precise) be a "superdelegate", and, b) having no 'rules' to govern how they make their picks and cast their votes, made it likely that this would occur at some point? Having made their bed they now need to lie in it...
On a different topic, the "they broke the rules and were dropped so now it wouldn't be fair to change the rules to allow them back in" explanation of why Florida and Michigan voters should have no say in selecting the Democratic Party nominee is so much hogwash. Was it these voters that changed the primary/caucus dates for their states? No! It was the Florida Legislature and the Michigan Democratic party. And so over 2.2 million primary voters will have no say (approximately 1.7 million Floridians & approximately 600,000 Michiganders) through no fault of their own. The biggest goats here are Senators Clinton and Obama, for showing no leadership in this matter. If the DNC wanted to strip delegates it should only have been the Floria/Michigan superdelegates... And now they should also strip out all DNC leadership members that were a part of this fiasco - starting with Howard Dean, who should attend the convention without a vote.
This begs the question of why they created two categories of delegates in the first place (3,253 delegates and 794 "superdelegates). Did they never expect any close contests in the future? Was it not forseeable that a) having one of every five delegates (19.6% to be precise) be a "superdelegate", and, b) having no 'rules' to govern how they make their picks and cast their votes, made it likely that this would occur at some point? Having made their bed they now need to lie in it...
On a different topic, the "they broke the rules and were dropped so now it wouldn't be fair to change the rules to allow them back in" explanation of why Florida and Michigan voters should have no say in selecting the Democratic Party nominee is so much hogwash. Was it these voters that changed the primary/caucus dates for their states? No! It was the Florida Legislature and the Michigan Democratic party. And so over 2.2 million primary voters will have no say (approximately 1.7 million Floridians & approximately 600,000 Michiganders) through no fault of their own. The biggest goats here are Senators Clinton and Obama, for showing no leadership in this matter. If the DNC wanted to strip delegates it should only have been the Floria/Michigan superdelegates... And now they should also strip out all DNC leadership members that were a part of this fiasco - starting with Howard Dean, who should attend the convention without a vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment