.
Today when I was reading the enclosed article on The New York Times I realized that there is light at the end of the tunnel for the Democratic Party after all.
As Geraldine Ferraro mentioned on her article: "the superdelegates were created to lead, not to follow. They were, and are, expected to determine what is best for our party and best for the country."
If that is the case then, the superdelegates have the power to draft Al Gore to be the Democratic Party nominee for the November 2008 presidential election.
Again, if the purpose of the superdelegates were, and are, expected to determine what is best for our party and best for the country.
After reading Mrs. Ferraro’s article it became clear to me that: "If that is the case, we could end up with a nominee who has been actively supported by, at most, 15 percent of registered Democrats. That’s hardly a grassroots mandate."
At the end of the day this is what the Democratic Party primary has accomplished: "we could end up with a nominee who has been actively supported by, at most, 15 percent of registered Democrats. That’s hardly a grassroots mandate."
.
.
As of January 2004 the Democratic Party had 72 million registered members – that means that we could end up with a nominee who has been actively supported by, at most, 15 percent of registered Democrats (about 11 million Democratic Party members). That’s hardly a grassroots mandate.
Compare that with the result of the presidential election of 2000
Popular vote:
Al Gore = 51,003,926
George W. Bush = 50,460,110
Note: I am sure that there are more than 11 million Democratic Party registered voters who would prefer to vote for Al Gore in November 2008.
If I had to make an educated guess about the result of the 2008 presidential election I would guess that this time around Al Gore would get over 65 million votes and would be elected president of the United States with a solid mandate.
******
Let me quote parts of Mrs. Ferraro article because these facts are important to the point that I am trying to make on this diary as follows:
"...After the 1980 presidential election, the Democratic Party was in disarray. That year, Senator Ted Kennedy had challenged President Jimmy Carter for the presidential nomination, and Mr. Kennedy took the fight to the convention floor by proposing 23 amendments to the party platform. When it was all over, members of Congress who were concerned about their re-election walked away from the president and from the party. The rest of the campaign was plagued by infighting.
In 1982, we tried to remedy some of the party’s internal problems by creating the Hunt Commission, which reformed the way the party selects its presidential nominees. Because I was then the vice chairwoman of the House Democratic Caucus, Tip O’Neill, the speaker of the House, appointed me as his representative to the commission. The commission considered several reforms, but one of the most significant was the creation of superdelegates, the reform in which I was most involved.
... Today, with the possibility that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will end up with about the same number of delegates after all 50 states have held their primaries and caucuses, the pundits and many others are saying that superdelegates should not decide who the nominee will be. That decision, they say, should rest with the rank-and-file Democrats who went to the polls and voted.
But the superdelegates were created to lead, not to follow. They were, and are, expected to determine what is best for our party and best for the country.
... Besides, the delegate totals from primaries and caucuses do not necessarily reflect the will of rank-and-file Democrats. Most Democrats have not been heard from at the polls. We have all been impressed by the turnout for this year’s primaries — clearly both candidates have excited and engaged the party’s membership — but, even so, turnout for primaries and caucuses is notoriously low. It would be shocking if 30 percent of registered Democrats have participated.
If that is the case, we could end up with a nominee who has been actively supported by, at most, 15 percent of registered Democrats. That’s hardly a grassroots mandate.
More important, although many states like New York have closed primaries in which only enrolled Democrats are allowed to vote, in many other states Republicans and independents can make the difference by voting in Democratic primaries or caucuses.
In the Democratic primary in South Carolina, tens of thousands of Republicans and independents no doubt voted, many of them for Mr. Obama. The same rules prevail at the Iowa caucuses, in which Mr. Obama also triumphed.
He won his delegates fair and square, but those delegates represent the wishes not only of grassroots Democrats, but also Republicans and independents.
****
If you want to read the entire article go to the following website:
"Got a Problem? Ask the Super" By GERALDINE A. FERRARO
Published: February 25, 2008 - The New York Times
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/...
Geraldine A. Ferraro, a lawyer and a former member of Congress, was the Democratic vice presidential candidate in 1984.
.