The system is broken
February 13, 2008 8:03 AM   Subscribe

With Obama winning state after state and Clinton tying herself to Texas and Ohio it appears that the DNC has been betting on a system where momentum would be able to carry a candidate to the nomination. What I understand from the delegate system along with the Electoral College, is that it is possible to not only win the presidency without winning the popular vote, but you can also win a parties nomination without winning the popular vote. When the majority of people can be entirely cut out of the process for both nomination and election, isn’t that a clear sign the system is broken.
posted by hexxed (19 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: This is really pretty thin Here's Some Election Basics roundup stuff; there's no meat here, and we're well thick into the electionfilter season so it's doubly unnecessary among the overdose of detailed posts we've seen and will no doubt continue to see. -- cortex



 
1. Your Electoral College link is borked.
2. First person needs to go.
3. We know you're new at this. No need to mention it.
posted by emelenjr at 8:09 AM on February 13, 2008


Actually, all of your links are borked.
posted by emelenjr at 8:10 AM on February 13, 2008


Slate has been covering momentum frequently as of late (and so has On The Media).
posted by The Michael The at 8:12 AM on February 13, 2008


This is really more of a blog post. A good post should be about something cool you've found on the web--this seems more like you had something you wanted to say and dug up a bunch of links to sort of half-heartedly justify your editorial.
posted by EarBucket at 8:12 AM on February 13, 2008


link should be win the presidency without winning the popular vote
posted by Daddy-O at 8:12 AM on February 13, 2008


I just wrote the Democratic party today. I am so appalled that they haven't taken a stance on how this will work out. I know Gore, Carter, Sharpton, Pelosi, etc. have stayed neutral because they think they will have to broker a deal, but it's not good enough. It makes the party look bad, and the system appear blatantly back-room controlled. If they let superdelegates decide this election, and god forbid if they bring Michigan and Florida back into the fold without a 2nd primary... my god. I will feel so disenfranchised it's not even funny (Disclaimer: I am a Clinton supporter... no ulterior motives here).
posted by fusinski at 8:12 AM on February 13, 2008


Editorializing. No, thanks.
posted by casarkos at 8:12 AM on February 13, 2008


I disagree. Sometimes it's a good thing that the majority doesn't have final say.
posted by TheNewWazoo at 8:13 AM on February 13, 2008


(Not that I don't wholeheartedly agree with your editorial slant, but this isn't a good FPP. There are what, three or four open Obama threads right now that this could have gone into as a comment.)
posted by EarBucket at 8:13 AM on February 13, 2008


Ha! It's so true!
posted by Pecinpah at 8:13 AM on February 13, 2008


Yeah, this is pretty thin.
posted by cashman at 8:13 AM on February 13, 2008


File under Fail. The SLOE isn't all that substantiated by the cloaking links.
posted by butterstick at 8:13 AM on February 13, 2008


Which is to say, obvious!
posted by Pecinpah at 8:14 AM on February 13, 2008


And not the best of the web! Yay!
posted by Pecinpah at 8:14 AM on February 13, 2008


Yes, bad post. There's nothing there!

Yes, the system is broken, but not because of the electoral college or superdelegates. What we need is proportional representation to encourage more participation in the government. Half of the country doesn't vote and doesn't care, because neither party represents them.

last comment?
posted by mrgrimm at 8:15 AM on February 13, 2008


They call me an old fart because I'm silent but deadly.
posted by Afroblanco at 8:15 AM on February 13, 2008


I will delete once I find out how.
posted by hexxed at 8:17 AM on February 13, 2008


Not really any substance than a Nation article that really doesn't address the coming problem of superdelegates deciding the Democratic nomination. Superdelegatesmay seem like the Electoral College, but they aren't. Superdelegates pledge to a candidate of their own free will. This worries some people that (Clinton/Obama) will be ahead in pledged delegates picked by voters but will lose due to the superdelegates. Electors in the electoral college are picked by the party that won, so the party will try their best to pick people that will not sell out.

Email a mod if you want it deleted. Click contact in the lower right hand corner of this page.
posted by ALongDecember at 8:18 AM on February 13, 2008


The contact link at the bottom of the page.
posted by smackfu at 8:18 AM on February 13, 2008


« Older Michigan to build the country's first Maglev...   |   Hark! A Vagrant History Comics by Kate Beaton Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments