AJC.com > Opinion > Opinion Talk > Archives > 2008 > February > 06
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Should the Democrats stop allocating delegates proportionately?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Democrats are dedicated to egalitarianism —an instinct that is both the party’s strength and its weakness. Egalitarianism — a deeply held belief in the fundamental equality of all people, especially in political, economic and social life — was the party’s weakness in the 1970s, when it became a collection of warring factions, each dedicated to its own identity politics.
That same belief, however, has allowed the party to produce the first viable female and black candidates for president. Somewhere along the way, egalitarianism also led the Democrats to start dividing their nominating delegates proportionately. Unlike the Electoral College, which is a winner-take-all system, Democrats give each nominee a portion of a state’s delegates, roughly divided according to what percentage of the vote (or what geographic areas) he or she received. Is that a strength or a weakness?
If the Democrats did not award delegates proportionately, Sen. Clinton would have all-but secured the nomination by now, allowing her more time to consolidate the party in order to confront the Republican in November. In the Republican Party, which leans toward a winner-take-all system, McCain is much closer to securing the nomination.
Should the Democrats stop allocating delegates proportionately?
Permalink | Comments (24) | Categories: Forum
