“Hillary Clinton’s main advantage with regards to winning the nomination is not public sentiment, but instead, due to unelected superdelegates whose purpose, according to DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, is to suppress grassroots candidates in favor of the establishment choice. And it looks like they will have their way: As a result of the superdelegates voting almost unanimously for Hillary Clinton, often in clear defiance of the popular will of their states, the math does indeed look bleak for Bernie Sanders to win the Democratic nomination. Barring a major grassroots revolt, Hillary Clinton will seize the nomination. And she will lose to Donald Trump.”
The above an excerpt from the below link.
Here’s the reality, super delegates are the equivalent of Boss Tweed, gerrymandering, and redistricting – a tool to impose the will of in this case the DNC and party establishment.
I believe it can truthfully be said that the Revolutionary War was a grassroots movement to overthrow British rule, and as such was representative of the will of the people.
There is a certain cache to the words grassroots movements that conjures up individualism and access, perhaps even that “American Exceptionalism” we always hear so much about, especially during campaign season or a spin is being added.
The Democratic National Committee and it’s counterpart the Republican National Committee have assumed the role of warlords, they have prioritized maintaining the two party system and their fiefdoms – any true grassroots movement or candidate is seen as a threat and dealt with as such.
The mainstream media rides shotgun for them, not by conscription but as a volunteer army of minions.
So tell me, in a “democratic” society that flaunts the apparent misnomer of reflective representation how do you feel in knowing a select group of individuals can ignore and override your vote?
Perhaps the only redeeming value, and I use the word loosely when it comes to the RNC and Republican Party, is that they don’t have super delegates – but then maybe they believe it isn’t necessary when they have individuals like the Koch brothers who purchase politicians and influence elections and legislation with money.
Personally I happen to agree that if Hillary Clinton and Trump are the nominees Clinton will lose – she’s way to vulnerable with her late to the race declaration of being a reformer/progressive and carries a heavy burden, everything from Wall Street, “mis speaking” often, and statements like she doesn’t believe Glass Steagall needs to be reinstated.
Romney came very close to winning the previous election and public sentiment is such that the electorate is fed up with establishment party hacks …… that’s Mitt Romney, think about that for a moment.
Politicians can proclaim their candidacy a grassroots movement all they like if they believe it will resonate, yet the reality is in the current election cycle there are only two such movements – those of Sanders and Trump.
A simple choice I believe, either vote for a loud mouthed pathological liar like Trump or a man who has been a consistent champion of the people throughout his career and life like Sanders.
The third option I suppose would be to allow an establishment entity decide who they want to be president.