I'm a life-long democrat. Really. All my life. We had a straw poll in first grade (1988). I was the only one who voted for Dukakis. (Probably because everyone just voted for whoever their parents supported, and one girl circulated the rumor that "Dukakis wants to kill babies." I'm surprised I remember this.) In fifth grade, I was the "campaign manager" for then-Governor Clinton at my elementary school. We had all kinds of fun propaganda. I wrote a letter of support to President Clinton in ninth grade, when the Republicans shut down the United States that fall.
The 2000 election took place during my second year at the University of South Florida.
I turned 18 that September, and proudly cast my vote for Vice President Gore in Pinellas County. I was happy to have taken part in one of the few activities fundamentally guaranteed to citizens. Bush v. Gore broke my heart. I felt used. I didn't sleep for days. I also decided to go to law school because of it. This was injustice at the highest level.
I met John Kerry at a dive restaurant during his 2004 campaign. I campaigned for Senator Kerry in Ohio. I knocked on doors, made calls, donated money... and it wasn't enough. I stuck with this party, because I believed in it.
Now, we are faced with a bizarre nomination situation where one candidate may actively seek to usurp the intent of the voters because of her own thirst for power. If this party allows that, it has lost me for life.
Here we are. 2008. The year we have been waiting for. We have bumper stickers that ask "Is it 2008 yet?" Each night, KO tells us how many days its been since "Mission Accomplished." Finally we have the chance to turn to actual leadership. Constitutional leadership.
I'm now 26. I'm sitting for the bar exam in July. I have the potential to be the kind of person that this Party needs in order to survive -- a donor, a volunteer, an attorney, and perhaps a member of society. If this Party allows Senator Clinton to win the nomination based on something other than the votes -- albeit a twisted sort of democracy, but the one we've agreed to -- it has lost me for life.
In the dark days after Bush v. Gore we took comfort in Justice Stevens' dissent. We took comfort that Democrats would never assault the system as brazenly as the conservative Justices had. This is part of what he wrote:
What must underlie petitioners' entire federal assault on the Florida election procedures is an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed. Otherwise, their position is wholly without merit. The endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land. It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.
Fill in the blanks, and the Clintons are no better than the Bush camp was in 2000. Their position is absurd, and if they believe -- as I do -- that Bush v. Gore was wrongly decided, Senator Clinton must do what is best for the party before we converge on Denver.
Otherwise, where else is there to turn when our nominee doesn't trust the voters?