With the presidential candidates from the Democratic party in a race that may not be decided by the primaries and caucuses, the 800 super-delegates might get to pick the nominee for that party. And one newscaster recently commented that, “they can vote on a whim.”
A whim? One of the most important political decisions in this country can be decided on a whim?
Does anyone else find this beyond believable?
We have gone so far from “representation of the people” that it is no wonder we have such poor showings at the polls. Too many people think that government no longer responds to the voters so why bother.
Well, we do need to bother, and maybe that way government will start listening. But that is a topic for another blog.
The other day I had lunch with a friend, whose intelligence I highly respect, and we discussed this whole mess of a political system. She agreed with me that there needs to be some changes, but didn’t agree that significant change was possible. Her comment was that the system is way too big and interdependent to be able to simplify.
We did agree that in an ideal world, all leaders would be benevolent and truly work for the people, but we don’t live in an ideal world. Governments are run by people and people are flawed creatures. They don’t always do the right thing.
But I don’t think that fact leaves us at the mercy of the status quo. There is still room for political reform, and I think the first thing to go should be the super-delegates. Then maybe do away with delegates all together. Let the nominee be picked by the popular vote, and maybe save the millions that are spent on the conventions.
Just a thought…. Anyone else?
I agree that the process is tremendously broken. However I’m not sure change is possible so long as those who hold the power and clout benefit from the system. We’d need a new crop of honest idealists to get involved in politics and somehow not become corrupted by the toxic exposure.
Thanks for your comments, Anj. Now lets just see if we can find some honest idealists to elect.