The Continued Flaws in the Democrat Nominating Process

I previously highlighted the power that Democrats give to their elites in the form of Super-Delegate votes. Essentially an elected official is work a couple thousand regular voters, which gives Hillary a lead.

The Nevada Caucuses for the Democrats also proved a problem with fairness, this time benefiting Barack Obama. Clinton won the support of more Nevada Caucus-goers but because of the method the Democrat Party in Nevada works, Barack Obama ended up with more delegates in the final count. Hardly fair or in line with democratic principles (small “d” democratic principles as in the form of government).

Now there is the issue the Febuary 5th elections and the awarding of delegates by Congressional district. If a Democrat candidate gets at least 15% of the vote in a congressional district, they are guaranteed 1 delegate from that district, which could equal 33% of the delegates granted. So if Obama wins 85% of a district, and Clinton wins 15%, she gets 33% of the delegates (1 out of the three) awarded for that district. Even worse would be if Edwards gets 15%, Clinton gets 15% and Obama gets 70%… they all get 1 delegate each, despite the overwhelming victory of Obama. That seems hardly fair.

And some people might wonder why I hate national level politics.

Send this to a friend