Letters to the Editor
-
@jebldmm
you wrote:
" don't think the Obama campaign should really emphasize that he's winning more delegates after losing the election by a wide margin."
Umm, that's a good point, except it isn't true. She garnered exactly 100,858 more votes out of 2,816,224 - hardly a WIDE margin.
Another thing, it's not some kind of bizzare re-vote, it's part of their selection process. Think of it like a Mixed Member Proportional Representation (Like Germany)...both votes count, you can't win one part and claim victory, you kind of need to win the whole thing. You can't claim that the part your candidate won is the be all end all...and you certainly can't claim that the caucus part is not valid somehow (I mean what would the people who voted for Hillary say about that? That the effort they put into going out that night was useless? Seems suspect to me - but then your candidate seems to be quite content to tell great swaths of her support that they don't really count based on which state they live in, so I guess it's par for the course)
I just wish the media would be even just a smidge more honest and say that Texas has yet to be decided (which is, you know, the truth)
cheers!