Lessons learned this primary season
Jamie Thomson
Issue date: 6/6/08 Section: Ed-Op
It's been a long, arduous trek the past five months, but finally the presidential primary season has come to a close. For Republicans, it was over months ago when Sen. John McCain emerged as the de facto nominee; for Democrats, the contest wrapped up June 3 as Sen. Barack Obama obtained the magic number of delegates to clinch the nomination. As of press time it was reported by the New York Times on June 5 that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is slated to concede the race June 7.
Critics have been calling for Clinton to drop out for quite some time now, and for a while she seemed to be clinging to the pipedream that she was "winning the popular vote."
There is no national total of the "popular vote" in the primaries. They are a mash-up of caucuses and primary elections, and the rules vary widely in each state. Every state is different and has the right to decide what works best for its residents, keeping in mind the regulations set forth by the Democratic National Committee. The goal of the primaries is not to determine the will of the American people; it is to determine the will of the Democratic Party in a given state, and in turn transmit that will via delegates to the national convention in August.
The only thing that matters in the primaries is the delegate count. It's not disenfranchisement; it's how the system works.
The delegate system has come under close scrutiny by the media and the public during this election cycle, and with good reason. There has been throughout this race the strong potential that the superdelegates - select party officials whose votes are independent of the will of the states, and make up about 19 percent of the 4,234 delegates at the convention - will have the final say on who the nominee is. Additionally, the pledged delegates, though they tend to comply with the will of their states, are not technically required to vote for a specific candidate.
Thus far, despite the media-fueled rumors that the superdelegates may overturn the "will of the people" by swinging the election back in Clinton's favor, most of them are moving toward Obama, who - by the pledged delegate count - is the apparent people's choice. Surely there is also internal politicking that is involved in lobbying for superdelegates' support, but the point of giving the political elite a voice at the convention is that they understand more about the internal workings of the party; they serve as the voice of strategy and experience. Politics is complicated, and even in this modern age where information and communication are abundant, the average citizen does not necessarily have the political knowledge to determine who is most electable or is most likely to bring unity to the party.
Critics have been calling for Clinton to drop out for quite some time now, and for a while she seemed to be clinging to the pipedream that she was "winning the popular vote."
There is no national total of the "popular vote" in the primaries. They are a mash-up of caucuses and primary elections, and the rules vary widely in each state. Every state is different and has the right to decide what works best for its residents, keeping in mind the regulations set forth by the Democratic National Committee. The goal of the primaries is not to determine the will of the American people; it is to determine the will of the Democratic Party in a given state, and in turn transmit that will via delegates to the national convention in August.
The only thing that matters in the primaries is the delegate count. It's not disenfranchisement; it's how the system works.
The delegate system has come under close scrutiny by the media and the public during this election cycle, and with good reason. There has been throughout this race the strong potential that the superdelegates - select party officials whose votes are independent of the will of the states, and make up about 19 percent of the 4,234 delegates at the convention - will have the final say on who the nominee is. Additionally, the pledged delegates, though they tend to comply with the will of their states, are not technically required to vote for a specific candidate.
Thus far, despite the media-fueled rumors that the superdelegates may overturn the "will of the people" by swinging the election back in Clinton's favor, most of them are moving toward Obama, who - by the pledged delegate count - is the apparent people's choice. Surely there is also internal politicking that is involved in lobbying for superdelegates' support, but the point of giving the political elite a voice at the convention is that they understand more about the internal workings of the party; they serve as the voice of strategy and experience. Politics is complicated, and even in this modern age where information and communication are abundant, the average citizen does not necessarily have the political knowledge to determine who is most electable or is most likely to bring unity to the party.
Be the first to comment on this story