It’s happening. Obama has the most delegates by virtue of your votes, our citizens. But Hillary has the lead in total delegates, 783-709. How is that possible? Because of a bunch of Democratic party officials got together and decided that they prefer Hillary, so they gave her the lead in spite of the fact that you, the voters, gave Obama the lead. Who says Republicans are the only ones who know how to steal elections?
For those of you who thought Super Tuesday might have settle something on the Democratic side of the ledger…what in the Hell were you thinking?? Then again, there seems to be so much intrigue and behind-the-scenes maneuvering that your vote may end up meaning absolutely nothing. Think I’m kidding? Currently, Barack Obama has the most pledged delegates by virtue of the popular vote (603-590), and yet Hillary Clinton is leading in total delegates. How is that possible in a democratic process? It’s possible because, in the Democratic Party, the nomenklatura can vote as they see fit. This means that the candidate preferred by the party establishment- Hillary Clinton- has a built-in advantage is a close race.
And you thought one-man-one-vote was what the Democratic Party stood for? Yeah, and I’ll wager that you believe in the Tooth Fairy….
[I]n addition to the delegates each candidate wins based upon how well they do in each state, each state’s Senators, Members of the House, Governor and certain Democratic National Committee officials are their own delegates and they get to vote too. But they don’t get to vote like you get to vote. No. They’re already delegates, and they get to choose who they throw their delegate vote behind. So what happens is that so far in this race Obama is ahead. But Hillary has a lead in Superdelegates over Obama, 2-1. Those Superdelegates - i.e., party officials that have nothing to do with your vote - have decided to give Hillary the lead in spite of your vote. How do you like that?
I’ve already endorsed Obama, but I’m first and foremost a Democrat, and I’m concerned that the dishonesty inherent in the super delegate system will give Clinton the party’s nomination while at the same time alienating Obama supporters. If the nomination isn’t achieved honestly, if Clinton has to rely on the party’s nomenklatura to win, they we will have proven ourselves to be no different from Republicans, for whom stealing elections appears to be a time-honored tradition.
I, like most Democrats, will support the Party’s eventual nominee, whoever that turns out to be. Winning in November is the ultimate goal, and we all have our eyes on that prize. If Clinton wins the nomination by relying on the support of super delegates, however, her credibility will be something close to zero. The eventual nominee must win their place in the general election fairly and honestly. I believe that will eventually be the case, but I’m also concerned that the nomenklatura may use their delegates in order to swing the nomination to Clinton. This must not be allowed to happen if Deomcrats are to maintain any semblance of credibility going into the general election.
WE DESERVE BETTER.
