Though there are still primaries left, the Democratic Party may be headed for an August dilemma. Neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama is likely to enter the convention with a clinching majority of committed delegates chosen by voters in primaries and caucuses, but Obama is almost guaranteed to have more of them. So, barring a huge late turnaround, the deciding votes will come from the approximately 800 “superdelegates,” automatically seated ex officio and free to vote as they please.
Who are these powerful insiders? Why are they there? The story goes back 40 years, to when the party, battered by the bloody debacle of the 1968 convention and subsequent loss to Richard Nixon, revised its method of selection to bring in more delegates who were outside the official circles of power, particularly women and people of color.
But in 1972 George McGovern lost 49 states. In 1976 Jimmy Carter squeezed out a close win over Gerald Ford, who was still floundering in the blowback from Watergate, and in 1980 Carter was buried under a Reagan landslide. In 1982, looking at this record of three losses in four tries, the party leaders decided to reform their earlier reform and bring back seasoned veterans familiar with the unlovely sausage-making machinery of actually choosing a candidate who can win.
The list now includes all Democratic members of Congress and of the Democratic National Committee, all sitting Democratic governors, all living former Democratic presidents and vice presidents and all past Democratic majority or minority leaders in both houses of Congress. They make up about 20 percent of all the delegates-but 40 percent of the 2,025 needed to nominate.
If the Clinton team can persuade these men and women by summer that Obama is unable to win the general election and they choose her despite primary vote numbers in his favor, there is sure to be a loud and anguished protest about the violation of the democratic process. Delegates who have sweated their way through grueling primaries to win votes for their favorite don’t want to feel that they simply took part in a nonbinding beauty contest. But the “supers” (a term the Democratic Party officially dislikes) could bristle equally at the idea of simply rubber-stamping the decision of delegates swept into the convention hall on a possibly short-lived wave of enthusiasm for a charismatic candidate. Either way, when the winner’s hand is raised on the platform amid the bands and the balloons, it’s going to be a wounded Democratic Party that finally gets down to contesting John McCain. And there’s a possibility that disgruntled stay-home supporters of the loser could hand the election to the Republicans.
The party’s in a pickle for which reformers and counter-reformers prepared the vat and the spices.
The problem didn’t arise sooner because in all the Democratic nomination contests from 1984 on, the winners had the victory sewed up before the opening gavel fell. The new formula yielded only two wins in six elections. Actually, three, for Al Gore would have clearly won in Florida but for the questionable denial of ballots to large numbers of African-Americans and the confusion of many elderly Democratic voters by a “butterfly ballot” that made it hard to pick out Gore’s line. The Supreme Court’s fiat, however, confirmed the theft.
In all it appears that the post-1968 reforms as modified by the post-1980 reforms have not been lucky for the Democrats. The law of unintended consequences that often dogs reformers may be at work.
Open primaries, first introduced at the start of the last century, were a wonderful democratizing idea. But no one could foresee how, a century later, the primaries themselves would suffer the debasements of the general election-too much money required simply to enter the race, let alone win; too much media attention to personalities and too little to policies, principles and programs.
Certainly it was heartening after 1968 to see faces on the Democratic convention floor more representative of the variety of American voters. And most people do not yearn for the era of nominations made at 2 a.m. by the old (and white) boys in the smoke-filled rooms. Yet look at what the old system produced, contrasted with the new. In the 10 elections ending in 1968 the Democrats nominated Franklin D. Roosevelt four times, Harry Truman, Adlai Stevenson twice, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey. In the nine since then, McGovern, Carter twice, Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton twice, Gore and John Kerry. Whatever their individual virtues, it would be hard to argue that they represent a major improvement on those seven predecessors.
It does seem as if the arranged marriage between a system of popularly chosen committed delegates and a small but potentially decisive cadre of unpledged and unelected but highly experienced delegates has struck a snag. Whatever happens this November, thoughtful Democrats of all persuasions need to take another look, perhaps another stab, at reconciling the two-or expediting a divorce.
Bernard Weisberger is a retired historian, journalist and author of numerous books. He was a columnist for many years at American Heritage magazine. His most recent book of political history is “America Afire: The Disputed Election of 1800.”
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C.
Its over.
Clinton has to borrow money–no way anyone will back her now(except Republicans).
Chances are she will ride it out until the primaries are over and call it quits or face the super delegates coming forward and saying they all support Obama.
The Democrats should terminate the absurdly silly process they have created, prolonged unnecessarily at the request of the media, which sees it as a way to bring in cash over an extended period of time as well as a way to control elections, and drastically curtail the unreasonable span of its primaries. This would force candidates to address the issues with an seriousness and intensity. Right now, after countless pseudo-debates, I still do not know where any candidate stands on the real issues of the day, how he or she would deal with them. For all the blather on what passes for media in the U.S., I feel uninformed and exhausted. My inclination is to forego the coming election because it seems a hopeless mess the Democrats can’t win.
I still think a draft of Gore would do wonders for Dem unity and complete Repuglican rejection.
Otherwise……
The Democrats should have made a rule prior to the Nov. 2006 elections that prohibited the primary campaign from starting prior to January 1, 2008.
By starting the primary campaign in November 2006, the need for candidates to raise boatloads of money for protracted campaigns has put the Democrats at a serious disadvantage for the 2008 general election.
The author states, “The new formula yielded only two wins in six elections. Actually, three, for Al Gore would have clearly won in Florida but for the questionable denial of ballots to large numbers of African-Americans and the confusion of many elderly Democratic voters by a ‘butterfly ballot’ that made it hard to pick out Gore’s line.”
Well, I was one of those Palm Beach County voters who was subjected to the butterly ballot, and I’m neither elderly, feeble nor stupid. And to this day, I still don’t know whether I voted for Al Gore (my intended vote) or Pat Buchanan. I remember pulling out the card and looking at it, trying to figure out who the hell I’d just voted for, because the candidates’ names didn’t line up with the holes to be punched. Thanks a bunch for that, Theresa Lepore (Supervisor of Elections for Palm Beach County).
andersdl, you are right. They should have groups of states votiing at the same time and be through with it much earlier. When Iowa votes, for example, include a band of states. I wonder if Edwards would have still been in the running then. Stretching it out MAKES the campaign more about money that it has to be.
I’m tending more and more to disagree that the Dems have ruined themselves for Fall 08. By having these big, loud, get-to-know-you sessions in nearly every state, they’ve made their marks to the point that McCain has become nearly invisible. As for wrecking each other, watch how fast Hillary’s people move to Obama once they see that the alternative is McSame. It’ll be like lightening.
Now if only Obama would go against the grain of hyper-militarism …then I might consider him over the third party I’m probably going to vote for!
The supers could have stopped this a month ago; even today Hillary is getting more and more overtly racist in her campaign, and they won’t stop her. The supers do indeed reflect the Democratic Party–gutless unprincipled opportunists.
I am hoping and hoping that the superdelegates will have the good sense to stop Obama before it’s too late (if it isn’t allready). I don’t want to have be saying “I told you so” to the Obamaniacs a year from now (if he becomes President) over his failures in a job he is ill-equipped for and won’t do well (and he will somehow be seen as “progressive” when he really isn’t - he’s a centrist, Republican-lite slimy politician - read his policy positions, listen to what he actually says, and more importantly, doesn’t say - and realize he isn’t being held to the line on any progressive policies). I’d prefer a brokered convention, but of the three “viables”, Clinton is the best of the three. Obamaniacs are WRONG WRONG WRONG!
The “supers” are just a herd of cats who need to pointed in a sensible direction and “managed”. Look for Barack to get it done, and long before the convention (that tantalizing August food fight that media is salivating over.)
Rich-
Hilary is the more progressive? Are you kidding? The one who wants to “obliterate” Iran? America will NEVER elect the progressive of your dreams-but Hillary? Come on.
exactly what lk in va just said; the words were in my head for Rich when I read that one.
Rich sounds like a ’swiftboating’ repug in disguise.
“Rich sounds like a ’swiftboating’ repug in disguise.”
or a typical DLC Clinton worshipper, who would rather vote for McCain than Obama even though, as his savior even admits, there are very few differences between her and Obama.
If the Democrats implode and lose the general election, it is only because they deserve it. We really nead a third or fourth party in this country. This nonsense has gone on for long enough. We haven’t had a decent choice between the two nominees for several elections now.
The left wing of the Democratic Party has been without a national leader since the JFK/RFK assassinations. (This was the objective of those assassinations.) While any sensible person rightly fears Republicans, the left finds the conservative Democrats almost indistinguishable from the GOP. The polarization of the party reflects this constituency; the left hopes to get the party as a whole to recognize and validate it. Obama is certain to disappoint, but if he fails to acknowledge the left, his presidency may fail and he cannot expect a second term. HRC expects to win by keeping the left a hostage to the conservative wing of the Democratic Party. This struggle is vital to future of the nation. Conservatism has failed because it is wrong. It clings to a past vision and cannot reach out for a new one. The left must pursue this path to find itself, even if it brings the Democratic Party down. (One can only hope.)
Of course we have a pathetic excuse for a representative democracy. Of course no real progressive has a chance to be elected in the current environment. But this election is real and the differences are real! The blood of hundreds of thousands or even millions of individuals, the great majority of which are likely to reside in foreign lands, will be on the hands of anyone who does nothing while the worst predators on the planet try to install the most dangerous man on the planet, Madman McCain, into the oval office. American progressives need to stop crying about how their progressive dreams will never be realized. USA citizens do have some small ability to influence the future of peace and war in the world, and we are worse than dirtbags if we do not do what we can to realistically reduce the probability of aggressive wars by the USA in the future.
Hasn’t the USA done enough damage and haven’t the “good Americans” done enough harm by standing by, dreaming about utopia, while the most dangerous, unprincipled, and bloodthirsty murderers ascend to the presidency?
I want to vote for the guy I can bowl with who has that damn preacher.
Contact your elected democratic representatives. You can find out on the internet with a quick search where they stand. Tell them to loudly, and publicly switch to Obama!
If they don’t, Hillary may answer the right’s prayers and give them a shot at a woman they justifiably hate. It will not be pretty. If we want to wrestle control of our party back, we have to get busy. Rush Limbaugh and other right wingers, have been the deciding factor in several races, and they know what they are doing. They are taking the decision out of our hands, and deciding for us.
We are once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Take the time to exercise what little power we have to avert this impending catastrophe.
Here is the problem: i am much further to the left than any of you. As usual, Obama supporters don’t do their homework! I’ve come to realize that Obama supporters can’t be reasoned with. You look at some stupid things she’s said (he HAS said similar things - look it up!), but on real substance, she’s the best of a bad three. I realize that most of you are really sick with the cult of Obama. I’m now happy I’ll get to say “I told you so!”
btw, if you bothered to read any of my posts, you’d know I plan on voting for Cynthia McKinney or perhaps Ralph Nader, who I have voted for before. I have never voted for a republican EVER. It makes you feel good to flap your gums on here, but where’s the evidence that Saint Barack is going to be progressive? What policies indicate he will be good for us? What leadership has he provided as a U.S. senator? Where is his money coming from/who are his Wall Street backers? I’ll be singing to you “I told you so” a year from now!
One thing to ponder: What would Obama do, if he were in the same situation as Hillary is now, where her chance of winning the nomination is astronomically small?
What if the tables were turned? What if we had a hypothetical situation where Clinton was slowly gaining on Obama in her delegate lead, and by May 7, her delegate lead over Obama was near 160? What would Obama do?
I am certain he would “see the writing on the wall”, hold a news conference, and graciously exit the race. He would thank all his supporters for a great campaign, but state that it was time for his party to unify around the nominee.
Now, with Hillary in this situation, what does she do? Tenaciously hang on to the bitter end, refusing to recognize reality.
She just believes it is her god-given birthright to be the nominee, and is probably muttering to herself, “how DARE somebody else be ahead of me by 160 delegates now? The nominee is supposed to be me…me…me.” With no regard to the damage done to her party.
Since she is so obsessed with her own power, and unconcerned about the common good, she definitely should never be in the Oval office (again, that is).
I’ve voted for Nader for the past 20+ years but considered voting for Obama until he dumped his preacher.
Hillary is toast.
She is in denial of this and is hoping for a Superdelegate miracle to give her the nomination, irregardless of the ultimate result. The Republicans may be feeding into this as they would rather have her as the opponent - and see the Democratic Party implode yet again.
Jon Stewart may have come up with her plan for the future - as McCain’s running mate. Might as well be and both can plan together to Obliterate Iran with 100 Years of War.
I’m against Clinton dropping out before the last primary, not for her sake and not for Obama. All the voters deserve to be heard, especially Puerto Rico. I’d also like to see revotes in Michigan and Florida, even if it hurts Obama. Next time the Democratic Party should abolish superdelegates. Let the primary voters have their say and the chips fall where they may. Primaries aren’t the real problem with elections; the real problem is television.
memos__poblation______ If Obama is so pure and fair-minded as you say, why did he fight giving the Florida voters the right to have their votes counted? Is it because he thinks he has some God given right to the nomination?
Superdelegate’s “super” price:
“Superdelegate wants $20m for vote”
Los Angeles, May 8: What will it take for a Democratic presidential candidate to win the support of California superdelegate Steven Ybarra? Say, $20 million.
The Democratic National Committee member doesn’t parse his words when it comes to what he wants from Barack Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton, an ironclad promise to spend that heady amount to register Mexican-American voters and get them to the polls in November. Superdelegates are party insiders and elected officials who can vote as they choose at the party’s August nominating convention. In this year’s close race, neither Mr Obama nor Ms Clinton can clinch the nomination without their help. In a telephone interview on Wednesday, Mr Ybarra said he plans to remain undecided in the tight contest until “someone shows me the money”. When will he settle on a candidate? “Nobody showed me any money yet,” he said.
He’s not kidding. To Mr Ybarra, a Sacramento, California, lawyer, the stakes are no less than winning the presidency in November. He predicted that as many as 1.3 million Mexican-Americans could be added to voter rolls in New Mexico, Colorado, Florida and other swing states, a potentially decisive edge for the eventual Democratic nominee.
With that investment of funds, Mexican-Americans would realise Democratic leaders “care about us,” Mr Ybarra said, referring to Mexican-Americans.
Is $20 million a lot to ask? In 2004, “they spent a billion to lose,” he said, referring to the last presidential election. (AP)
www.asianage.com, 9th May 2008
This highlights the “democracy” in Democratic party.
SHAME!!!
Why Democracy Still Matters in West Virginia (even when the media isn’t watching)
The mysterious gifting of the executive MBA to West Virginia Governor Manchin’s daughter more than represents the corruption of government by special interests. Persistent evidence of routine government corruption also raises the very interesting prospect of a political upset in, of all places, the state Democratic Party Primary Election this May 13. At a time when most people have given up hope in the democratic process in America, those wild and wonderful hillbillies stand ready to lead a nation out of a political dark age. With many states disenfranchised by unequal primary election dates and with such a late primary date compared to the other states, rational West Virginia citizens have naturally lost faith in their vote ever counting. Except now, with but a nod for one of the remaining war light candidates, Democrats have a real process on their hands. All eyes are on current freshman Delegate, Mel Kessler, having challenged the sitting Governor of his own party, while a large insider scandal involving Governor Manchin unfolds and with two Supreme Court seats up for grabs also under a cloud of scandal, election history is certainly about to be made in West “by God” Virginia.
The WVU scandal resembles the all too familiar pattern of government officials getting off the hook while a few underlings get demoted. This brewing election scandal in West Virginia, then, represents a whiff of the stench and arrogance of corruption. A scandal growing far worse than simply leaving the “Open for Business” signs up until the primary election. This corruption is the same as the political firing of Archives Director, Fred Armstrong. Armstrong refused to bend the rules for political favoritism and was retaliated against. Forget about Senator Rockefellers millions and Representative Capito’s infamous one of the most expensive congressional races in history. Mysterious tents of money, a compliant media and undisclosed campaign contributions in West Virginia politics are solid examples of why the state needs public financing laws for clean elections. Without clean elections, West Virginia can still turn to the voting booth. When faced with widespread corruption democracy may be the last chance to save one state in a nation drowning in corruption.
West Virginia has a case to make in favor of a national primary date. Disenfranchising the people from the political process is not just unequal voter treatment or red baiting being conducted by a simple liberal free press. A large party tent in the yard of the Governor’s Mansion was funded by an unaccountable group of contributors, currying favors no doubt. But this style of secret squirrel isn’t new to this Governor. In 2004 Manchin refused to debate then gubernatorial candidate, Jesse Johnson, of the WV Mountain Party, while Republican candidate, Monty Warner debated Johnson several times. Manchin may be Open for Business, but he isn’t an open government kind of guy.
Even more interesting in 2008, if Governor Manchin should limp away with a primary win, former Senator Russ Weeks, who wrote a tell all book about political cronyism in the state and once again Mountain Party gubernatorial candidate Johnson, are both poised to give Manchin a formidable run for his $2 million dollars in campaign contribution money. This scandal has so tarnished the Governor that even with the media blackout in effect, as no third party candidate has gotten fair media coverage in over a decade, Johnson now a successful Presidential hopeful nominee to the Green Party, will certainly be able to beat Manchin come November, even if the voters don’t privatize him on May 13.
So why are clean elections and this scandal so relevant? Democracy is, after all, about more than money. But, money matters. Looking back at 2004 while Mylan Pharmaceuticals had been gifting WVU with the tens of millions of dollars, they also gifted gubernatorial candidate, then Secretary of State, Manchin with free campaign helicopter rides. This same official was responsible to investigate campaign finance violations. Connections to Manchin and Mylan funny money are not the only problem in the mountain state this spring.
Another incident of corruption has West Virginians upset this year. The Supreme Court story of Justice, Elliot “Spike” Maynard, is nothing compared to the one that started a few years ago, when candidate for Supreme Court, now Justice Brent Benjamin, made his bed with king coal. A. T. Massy CEO Don Blankenship, king coal reincarnated, is not just a friend of Maynard, he gifted Mr. Benjamin with over 3 million dollars in direct campaign advertising for his Supreme Court race. Justice Benjamin has now voted in favor of Massey in a multimillion dollar case, with a larger case pending and Benjamin refuses to step aside, as the ethics laws require. Like Benjamin voting in favor of his benefactor once in office, Manchin smiled when he gutted the Pharmaceutical Cost Management Review recommendation for industry financial disclosure of gifts to doctors and hospitals. An eMBA for his daughter seems an appropriate reward for his corporate loyalty.
However, corruption relates directly to a variety of health problems when government regulators are in collusion with the regulated industry. Not to mention 2.4 billion dollars in uncollected fines and penalties in Clean Water Act violations by an industry responsible for also bankrupting the state workers’ compensation system. You didn’t know about the WV Department of Environmental Protection failing to enforce the Clean Water Act for over 5 years? Alarm bells are sounding. Voting booths are calling.
Our nation now has a taste of the over prescribed pharmaceuticals in the nation’s drinking water. Not because pharmaceutical pollution was detected by any state agencies designated as industry watch dogs and assigned to protect our environment. Disclosure of this water pollution is exempt and enforcement is not required. Pharmaceutical water pollution was identified instead by an alert Associated Press, who also found, with equally professional investigative journalism, industry air reporting exemptions are indeed bad for air quality too. An alert Pittsburgh Post Gazette also reported the mysterious MBA. Thank god for a free press. Most people are upset about the status of fear, poverty and endless occupation. People are ready to vote for a change from corrupt business influences to a sustainable stewardship and honesty in leadership. A state known by her motto “Mountaineers are always free” and at this point in history is certainly worth watching closely.
In West Virginia on May 13 is where a nation will see the return of Government of the people, for the people and by the people. If the elections are not completely rigged, and with 33 of West Virginia’s 55 counties using electronic voting machines rigged elections are a legitimate concern, but if all the votes count, Governor Manchin will be privatized in 2008. All of the eyes of the nation are watching West Virginia as a wild and wonderful state is about to smile on democracy. I know West Virginia, and with the elephant sized donkey in the room, she is about to deliver.
concerning the democratic primary race…
it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over,it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over,it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over, it’s over
concerning the general…
obama needs to find a nice progressive female as a running mate. if he’s assassinated before the convention the rightful heir will have rights, otherwise it would be all hillary at the convention. desperate people are driven to desperate measures..
if he makes it through denver - i’ll wager he’s our next president.
i respect those who will vote green or nader, i will join you if obama is denied the nomination (for any unforeseen reason). however i hope our voices can influence the discussion on the . vote your conscience…
…peace…
For the record. Gore won Florida even with the illegal purging of the rolls by Harris and Jeb Bush and the butterfly ballot.
http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=181
And for the Democrats who know that Gore won and are still twisted enough to think that Nader made him lose(?) - you are too stupid to reason with.
I hope Obama wins, if only because I believe he will try methods other than sheer brutality in the world arena. It would be nice if he took some initiatives on clean energy and human rights. That’s possible because US policies have shaded over to the insane, even for the interests of some of the less kleptocratic powerful. Otherwise I fully expect to be disgusted by his impassive face, evasive ways and ties to traditonal finance once he is elected. I will be shouting at the TV, I am sure.
In any case, the election is not the end of our problems. Little will change unless we sustain and build on the people’s newly awakened and fragile interest in politics. Feelings and perceptions need to be moved to action.
Not many posters have responded to the main argument: the advisability of the superdelegate system.
Personally, I think it’s a pretty good compromise. Superdelegates will not casually overturn or ignore the popular vote. They know that would ruin the Democratic candidate’s chances in the fall.
On the other hand, if Obama flames out somehow between now and the convention, we’ll be happy that the suberdelegates were able give the nomination to Shrillary.
One small note to “Classact” (sic) and anyone else who doesn´t study history.
you wrote:
“The left wing of the Democratic Party has been without a national leader since the JFK/RFK assassinations. (This was the objective of those assassinations.)”
Let´s see…JFK ran to the RIGHT of Richard Nixon, accusing the Republican Party under Eisenhower of being too soft on the Soviet Union and getting the US into a “missle gap”. There was none. And he knew it.
JFK sent troops into Vietnam after the French had languished there for years.
JFK oversaw the assassination of Pres. Diem in Vietnam.
JFK allowed the CIA to train murderers in Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam in order to forestall the inevitable support the Communists were getting. Labor leaders, teachers, pro-democracy activists and students were targets.
JFK hesitated to do anything to piss off the white Southerners he needed and was admonishing MLK, Jr., to “go slower.”
RFK, as JFK´s Attorney General initiated wiretaps on MLK, Jr´s phones and did NOTHING to stop his employee, J. Edgar Hoover from harrassing (and possibly conspiring to murder)King.
RFK, as Attorney General under JFK initiated contacts with the Mafia to assassinate Castro dozens of times, all attempts which failed but the blowback probably ended up killing his brother (which he basically alluded to in a phone conversation to Dulles after the event).
The USAmerican Left was never “led” by the Kennedy brothers. The USAmerican Left was spied upon and denigrated under both. Even a cursory reading of history should be necessary for so-called “Leftists” in the US. Otherwise, spewing nonsense like that distorts the true picture of what happened. Drop the illusions, the Dems and Reps are both the problem–and never the solution.
The people of the USA have been so ill informed as to what a change would really do and mean to this country and the change in leadership that is necessary, they have forgotten that no one could be worse than George Bush . . . No one, not even a dogcatcher, at least the dog catcher has compassion for
Animals!
The future leaders, Obama or McCain, should discuss the problems America and the world faces. The problem of public ignorance of the issues caused by the media is serious. In the heat of elections the media panders to voter ignorance. The emphasis, as we see on nightly, so-called news, is constant repetition of candidate’s miscues. The result of the media sensationalism becomes, the wrong problem and the wrong message at a crucial time in world history. The emphasis on having the politicians address a credible platform of ideas based on an American and global interaction in the world is critical.
There is not enough time left for civilization to focus on rubbish. The energy and environmental issues for example or food and health care are the problems the media should be focusing upon. But to use the Rev, Wright issue for one week, to try and hurt the candidacy of Obama is a travesty. The issues most pressing are once again avoided, those really important issues that must be put before the congress; the environment, continued funding of Iraq, energy issues, education, health care and so many others not dealt with, all impacting upon the economy, the failure of public dialog is outrageous!
The issue of this election will impact on the environment, economy and the future of the USA as no others. Still, if more than 50% of eligible voters cast their votes it will be a miracle, as a result of regressive US election laws and media obfuscation. It is compulsory for everyone to vote in Australia it should be so in the USA as well. Few of the candidates are really talking about the major points, even those who are the most erudite. The environment in association with the economy or health care and elections reform, to name some, are kept out of public dialog as a result of the nonsense punditry hours on end. The world looks at America and its “star struck reality” in wonder.
The political discussion rests on the complete lack of talking points in isolation, such as, Clinton’s health package or the nonsense gasoline tax rebate and it’s cost, rather than what is really at stake with energy issues, human survival. The candidates for the US presidency rarely talk about the complete interrelated package of the issues combined. Obama alludes to this deficiency in the media and public issues. When he asks for this to occur it lands on deaf ears because the media and special interests do not want this to occur.
The media reduces the public debate to its most simplistic level with pundits arguing about one inconsequential issue or another rather than the truly important issues of our time. The American people are kept from hearing and understanding the relationship of the entire package of issues, which a true leader must address and deal with for the very survival of America in the world within a global economy. The costs for the war would pay for every single need from health care to American infrastructure repair and education, as well as the alleviation of world hunger and energy research this is what is what is at stake.
The media deals with Rev. Wright and American Flag lapel pins instead.
The media keeps the public dumbed down for obvious reasons they represent the moneyed people. As a result the public becomes unable to talk about moving radically toward change and the related issues affecting their very life and the future. The issues of climate change, energy issues and the global economy not only American economy is the part of the mortgage crisis created by the “free market” system. All the other issues like people losing their homes as a result of Wall Street manipulation are tied to these fundamental problems. These is the first and major issue which affects all other issues and is completely related to the economic changes which must take place.
The media board rooms instruct their so-called journalists (news/opinion readers) to stay clear of those subjects that would attack advertising, consumption, tied together in the media collusion with special interests to maintain the consumer system killing the world. Media in collusion with government does not want the change that would result in the decline of their hundreds of millions of dollars in profits.
All environmental problems are in one way or another associated with the Western world’s consumption based lifestyle led by the USA. These issues are affected by consumer advertising much of it coming from the millions spent on advertising of irrelevant product and campaign advertising. The media should be dealing with true American and global issues in this campaign affecting the very basis of the so-called American Dream, fast becoming the global nightmare. This is what the next president of the USA must address!
When you take away the super delegates the non pledged delegates add in Michigan, Florida and the rest of the primaries, both are pretty much even. The 150 delegates out of more than 3500 is an illusion. The pledged delegates are the ones that the voters voted for and if you count all of them it is a DRAW!.
Now look at the small red states with cross over voters and caucuses that Obama won versus the big blue states that Clinton won. The unpledged and super delegates have to come to the conclusion that Hillary Clinton is the winner and should be the candidate.