Given that the United States is the “leader of the free world” and holds up Democracy as the One True Path, one might reasonably think our nominating process would make at least a little bit of sense. Right?
So why is it that yesterday in the Nevada caucuses, Hillary Clinton won the majority of state delegates — 51% — and was declared the winner, while Barack Obama came away with more national delegates (13 to her 12)? (From The Notion)
Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by about six points in the state’s caucus on Saturday, netting 12 of the 25 delegates at stake. But Barack Obama won the number that could matter most, earning 13 of Nevada’s national convention delegates, which ultimately determine the Democratic nominee.
She won! No, he won! I can’t be the only person looking at this today and thinking dark thoughts about the legitimacy of the process. Please, somebody, get rid of those caucuses already!
It seems that Barack Obama won one more of the national delegates than Hillary Clinton. However, that does not count the Super Delegates — a fancy term for “the Democratic party leadership thanks you for your participation, but reserves the right to fix the nomination if you mess things up”.
Furthermore, the delegates may or may not cast their votes the way Nevadans expect them to. (NBC’s First Read)
“No national convention delegates were awarded. That said, if the delegate preferences remain unchanged between now and April 2008, the calculations of national convention delegates being circulated by the Associated Press are correct. We look forward to our county and state conventions where we will choose the delegates for the nominee that Nevadans support.”
How messed up is this? Nevadans participated in this crazy system in good faith, and the delegates might change their preferences????
Meanwhile, Hillary won the majority of state caucus delegates, which is not — NOT — the same thing as saying she won the popular vote. There was no popular vote count from Nevada…. which means that no matter how hard people are going to spin it, this is not a throwback to the madness of the 2000 election.
The caucus system is so opaque, even the traditional press doesn’t understand that popular vote doesn’t apply here. No wonder people are getting tangled up!
Way to shine the light on Democracy, folks. Great job.
*Pah* What a bunch of horse-puckey!
The primaries are not “democratic” in the true sense of the term. Nor is the process by which a candidate is nominated. Each party in each state can make up its own rules. You’re right – this is in no way comparable to the 2000 Presidential elections, though it does share one characteristic – the popular vote is not necessarily what decides the winner.