Letters to the Editor
-
What if the democratic primary system is not all that bad??
Slow down, its supposed to be a long process. There is time to ask questions. Lots of pundits saying the Dem system is bad, broken and should be dumped. Is it really? How did it evolve? Is there nothing worthy here? Did Howard Dean actualy invent this system and therefor is responsible if you don't like the outcome? There is always room for improvement, but the system we have has had a long evolution that reflects many of the parties best thoughts and intentions. It has much to comend it.
The winner take all system of the Repubs has given them a nominee who has only one third of their popular vote. He was harshly treated by the party powerful and parts of the media. A month ago the pundits were telling us the Repubs were busy eating their own and destroying themselves. They now smile and hug and say they picked the best candidate. For the moment that gives them a modest temporary edge. So what? Its still March.
The Democratic party system is designed to help lesser known candidates run long enough to see if they have popular support. It prevents a big name candidate with early money and endorsments from being the only horse in the race. It works. It is much more small d democratic and representitive. It gives time for candidates to develop.
You say, "But it should not be so close by now!!" Would it be if Fl. and Mi had played by the rules? Quite possibly not! If they are allowed to change the rules now, the DNC will have no control of the thing in 2012.
You suggest, "Those who voted early may have changed their mind by now if they had the current information." Is this not the very nature of long primaries with successive votes over time? The stage gets set....the early states vote, the later states vote with the knowledge that came from the early states? The early states get to winnow the field, the later states get to dig in and develop the candidates? Why would you want to let early states re vote later?
"All 50 states at once!!" Stop that. Its impossible for a broad field to campaign in all states effectively without enormous funding. (Which they can't raise without a few early wins!) The 'All 50 states method' would never let anyone but the biggest funded name even be considered! Thats not Democratic.
"But now we have a virtual tie and we are no longer sure who is best for the General election". Hmmm, how could we design a system that could solve such potentials in the future? How about a group of experienced democrats? Ones who would vote their highest mind, based only on whats best for the short term AND long term of the Democratic party? Such delegates would not be needed in most years, but what an intelegent buffer to have available in extraordinary years!
The system we have is not perfect, (I favor a shorter time frame and primaries only open to Democrats and Idependants) But it is working. Calm your belly! It will produce a candidate with more popular appeal than the Republicans have. It will produce a candidate that is ready for the General Election. It will produce the candidate that helps the Party the most, now and tommorrow.
Enjoy!