Letters to the Editor
snoman
Published Letters: 191 Editor's Choice: 3
-
I agree with Levin
[Read the article: Obama camp willing to compromise on Florida]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]However, if there was _any_ indication that the rules commitee were going to do anything other than honor their ruling that both states be stripped of all their delegates no candidate would have agreed to not campaign in those states.
The Florida and Michigan primaries were nonbinding. It is ridiculous that the same committee that made those contests nonbinding is the same one where the Clinton supporting members are now insisting that they be made binding.
Look at the situation: a 30 person group that had 13 _declared_ Clinton supporters took the unprecedented step of stripping two states of all their delegates, asking that all candidates pledge not to participate in the primaries of those two states. Predictably, the two unsanctioned, nonbinding contests favored the candidate that had the highest name recognition. Five months later that same group has Clinton supporters insisting that the results of those illegitimate contests be honored, creating a chimera position that the rules of primary timings should not be honored but that the rules regarding the status of undecided votes be honored.
In my old hometown of Chicago we would say the fix was in.
-
The choice in November is simple
[Read the article: Committee reaches decision on Florida]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Vote Democrat or vote Republican.
Vote for a politican who has a lot in common with Hillary's agenda or vote for a politican who has been lock step with the W adminstration.
Vote for the person who wants to see veterans get the benefits, including a full ride college education, they deserve or vote for the guy blocking those benefits so that he with have enough retention to keep troops in Iraq for the next 100 years and to "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb...Bomb, Bomb Iran".
If your choice would be McCain over Obama in November you have no business having a say in who the Democratic nominee is, because you aren't a Democrat. Seriously, I don't want to hear your threats about voting Republican in November if you don't get your way. You think think Republicans give women a better shake? Go right ahead and walk across the aisle and find out first hand what misogyny really. I'll even give you a wire hanger as a going away present. I have no interest in trying to work with anyone negotiating with a gun at the table.
On the other hand, if you want to have a real discussion about race, gender, etc in this country, in this culture let's sit down and have one. We're progessives, We're Democrats, we can have these discussions. We can talk about how unfair Chris Matthews was. We can talk about an enviroment where Hillary nutcrakers are advertised. But we also are going to talk about "Obama" T-shirts featuring Curious George. We are going to talk about West Virginians who tell reporters they won't vote for any black person because they fear pay back if black people are put in a position of authority. We are going to talk about pundits and bloggers who out and out claim Obama is a Muslim Manchurian Candidate. We even going to talk about how Richardson's campaign was impacted by the immigration debate. We can talk about better ways to run future primaries. We can talk about what the calander should be. We can talk health care. We can talk poverty, education, foreign policy, everything that matters.
Just don't bother sitting at the table if you would be willing to vote Republican because you didn't get your first choice candidate because I can't hear people with short priorities.
-
She is still winning primaries because she is still popular
[Read the article: The new math in Florida and Michigan]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just not as popular as Obama.
As long as two candidates are in the race people will vote for the one they like more. People vote for who they like not who they think is going to win. That is why Hillary can still win places like Kentucky and Obama can still win places like Oregon. It just seems like she is winning a lot because places where people like her have been near the end of the season and people have forgetten contests from back in February that took place in states where they really don't like her.
If Clinton didn't have support she wouldn't have been able to drag this contest out as long as she has. She just doesn't have enough support to get the nomination.
Side note: The popular vote issue is murky at best. Hillary can only pretend to claim it if you count the nonbinding primary in Michigan, try to claim that zero people in Michigan wanted to vote for Obama, and don't count four states that did have sanctioned contests. Even if you count the nonbinding contest in Florida, Obama has had more voters choose him.
Aside from that, the popular vote measurements are weak because it doesn't reflect the varying natures of each states system. Open primaries get more voters than closed primaries which get more voters than caucuses. Trying to claim a popular vote victory when different states have different barriers to participation is problematic at best. Compare it to the General election where the eligibility to vote is more uniform across the nation. When the margin under Clinton's Michigan counts but four other states don't scenario is less than .4% then issues of who is allowed to vote in each state is very important.
Furthermore, the popular vote isn't the standard for winning. The standard of winning is who has the more delegates.