In order to decide who gets the super delegates Evan Bayh suggested that they consider the electoral votes of the states that each of them has won.
The Times goes on to point out that:
Many Democrats, including Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Bayh, have opposed the Electoral College in the past, particularly after 2000, when Florida’s 25 electoral votes were awarded to George W. Bush, who became president, even though Al Gore, the Democratic nominee, had won the popular vote nationwide.At the time, Mrs. Clinton, who had just been elected to the Senate, said, “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.”
Hmmmm.
Personally, I think Hillary should step down. It's pretty obvious that she's desperate and knows that her ship is sinking. We all know that that's probably not going to happen though. She wants a brokered convention. It's not what's best for the party, but she doesn't care about that.
I say we just leave it to the delegates' judgment. It's not cut and dried like the popular vote, the polls, number of delegates, or states won (all of which gives them to Obama), but I think that they'll all see which way the wind is blowing and make the right choice. Richardson does and hopefully Edwards does. I agree with a local radio host here that says if Edwards throws his endorsement Obama's way it's over. What say you?
Comments (4)
Hmmm.. brokered convention.. I wonder where this is all headed.. don't see Hillary backing down.. doesn't bode well for either candidate or the party.
The convoluted primary process seems to be the moose-on-the-table that no one talks about. Why did they not declare winners in each state that gets all of that state's delegates? Seems that the party has no one to blam but its leaders.
Posted by Kansas Bob![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.spitballpolitics.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
March 24, 2008 12:18 PM
Posted on March 24, 2008 12:18
Convoluted? This is the republican process:
For states with primaries, some states choose to use the "winner-take-all" method to award delegates within a state, while others do winner-take-all within a congressional district, and still others use the proportional process. Unlike the Democratic Party, where pledged delegates support the candidate whom they are pledged, state party by-laws determine whether each delegate is pledged and for how many ballots.
In caucus states, most state parties use a two pronged process. A straw poll, often called a presidential preference poll, is conducted of the attendees at the caucus. The results are released to the media and published on the state party website. Delegates are then elected to the county conventions. It is at the county conventions that delegates are elected to state conventions, and from the state convention to the national convention. At each level, delegates may be bound or unbound to a candidate. If unbound, delegates are not obligated to follow the results of the presidential preference poll. Thus, all estimates of delegates from caucus states are dependent on state party by-laws.
I think proportional representation is simple compared to that. You guys just didn't have two really solid candidates.
Posted by Scott![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.spitballpolitics.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
March 24, 2008 12:33 PM
Posted on March 24, 2008 12:33
Republican straw polls equate to buying voters. The Democratic nomination process at least seems a bit more...democratic.
I do agree that caucuses favor younger and more active voters though, which can be seen as good or bad, depending on whether you're an Obama or Clinton fan (respectively).
Posted by Patrick![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.spitballpolitics.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
March 24, 2008 1:22 PM
Posted on March 24, 2008 13:22
"You guys just didn't have two really solid candidates."
Not sure who "you guys" are - I had nothing to do with the process :)
But I am not sure that Romney would be out if they used the Democratic proportional process.
Posted by Kansas Bob![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.spitballpolitics.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
March 24, 2008 3:02 PM
Posted on March 24, 2008 15:02