Letters to the Editor
-
Thanks, but I prefer the will of the people
"These votes were a valid expression of sentiment when they were cast, but they lose their potency as an expression of the pure popular will as they age ... they could have changed their minds along the way"
Though that might be true, I haven't seen any data to back that people minds have changes, I would still much prefer the candidate to be chosen by voters than by the parties aristocracy. You hint, but do not directly say, that the super delegates should not be overridden by the pledged delegates but to me that would be a far greater travesty to democracy than the thought that people's minds could have changed. And don't dance around the idea of "If the convention were really designed to be a rubber stamp of the primaries, why not vote right before the delegates arrive in Denver?", an argument that the nomination process is flawed does not lead to an argument that the nomination process should be ignored by the super delegates.
If you think an aristocracy can do better than the people I think there's another party you could join.