I was going to entitle today’s column: “California, Just Freaking Vote Already!!!”, but since I don’t control either the electorate or time, I have been trying to be patient during this waiting period for the California primary to end on June 7.
Regarding this primary season from hindsight, the Democratic presidential primary was decided back in March, when Hillary Clinton gained a majority of votes and pledged delegates after Super Tuesday.
This lead was firmly ensconced in New York, which voted for Clinton near the end of April. Bernie Sanders, in second place, is a little less than 300 delegates behind the presumptive nominee. Clinton will more than likely get enough pledged delegates to clinch the nomination no later than June 14, if not earlier, by way of the California and New Jersey primaries. Yet, Sanders still plans to fight until the last vote is cast.
Why is Bernie still fighting? Framing his political situation in baseball terms, Sanders is at bat in the bottom of the 9th inning, with one man on base in a game where the score is 5-1 in favor of the pitching team, with two outs and the count is 2 balls and 2 strikes. And yet, he is still trying to get a hit.
At this pace, he will either strike out, walk if the pitching collapses, hit one RBI or hit a home run. The odds are high that even in the best of circumstances, he will not score enough to win the game. But at this stage, with his persistence, you have to think winning the nomination is probably not his aim.
You are probably catching news of Sanders entreating and getting the Democratic National Committee to include a delegation of four pro-Sanders representatives to sit on the convention planning committee, which includes Dr. Cornell West, a far-left leaning leader in the African American community and outspoken critic of President Obama. Sanders’ campaign legal team also wrote to the DNC to remove Barney Frank as chair of the convention, for what many gather as a longstanding feud and rivalry between the two during Frank’s time in Congress.
Sanders’ team lost that one. But he is right to persist fighting to the end, as he promised. If not for votes, then for ideas that could improve the process of electing our presidential candidates.
As an Independent running for the first time as a Democrat, Sanders questioned the ‘eccentric’ ways Democrats go about selecting Presidential nominees. Why did Hillary gain more delegates than Sanders in states she lost? Why do we still have caucuses in some states, and open or closed primaries in others? Why are delegates apportioned the way they are? And why do Superdelegates still exist?
For that matter, let’s take this further: why is gerrymandering still allowed to assure a single party majority in one state? Why can’t there be a mandatory voting day on a Sunday when people have time to vote, as President Obama suggested?
As it stands today, awarding correctly apportioned delegates in states Bernie won would not make any difference — Hillary is leading in every other metric from caucuses to closed and open primaries, pledged delegates and popular vote. If that Sanders delegate re-apportionment was to happen now, Clinton’s lead in pledged delegates would not change so drastically that the result would flip. She would still be the nominee.
Curious about what the epic Uranus-Eris conjunction means for you? Intrigued by the dance of Neptune and Chiron in Pisces? In our exciting new class with Eric Francis, The Astrology of Now, your questions will receive thoughtful and insightful answers — and you’ll have lots of fun in the process. Sign up here.
But Sanders is right in pointing out that even though many of these state nominating processes were created to address unfairness or inequity in the past, the way we select nominees to the Presidency of the United States has grown archaic, seemingly corrupt and appears ultimately unfair to the voters.
Yet it’s an absolute cash cow for every news network looking for the next month’s campaign ad buys. Like they do for most products. Which is probably the reason things are as they stand. At least for now. We like to crystallize business ideas into profit-making entities in America, and we have turned our politics of life, death and taxes into a money making machine for the networks. We know who owns those. These are the wheels that keep grinding away at our will to make the most important decision in our little section of the world.
If nothing else comes from the Sanders candidacy, we should be grateful that he’s drawn attention to this major — if not dangerous — flaw in the political machinery of our ‘democracy’. We have an 18th Century machine in the 21st Century — and we’re paying lots of money for it. The machine includes the electoral college, the two-party system, and our founding fathers’ good intentions when they were drawing up the map of the new nation.
Back then we were a mostly rural country ruled by white property owners, and a very large part of our citizenry were not citizens but in custody as slaves; women were consigned to the roles of baby maker and consort. Looking at that history now, have we come any further? Bernie Sanders’ campaign may soon be over, yet good ideas remain from his challenges to our traditional way of doing things, and the way we’ve used those traditions to hold on to power. Just because we did it before doesn’t mean it should work now, and 46% of the voters in the Democratic presidential nominating primaries agree. The DNC better be listening.
Not all ideas stand the test of time. But good ideas should. Like a democratic republic in every sense of the word, one that represents this country and its people who are far different from what we were when we started more than two centuries ago.
After the first Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
Have we kept our republic? You tell me. Because, thanks to this primary process in 2016, we can look from the stands and realize that the last batter up is really us, neck-deep in a full count, three balls and two strikes. We’re in a game with serious consequences for the country and the world.
What’s at stake is how much our individual votes do matter for this republic. And how much more they could matter if we fight to make all votes count, from primary to Presidential. Not for Bernie’s team or Hillary’s team now, but for us. And we’re going to need every vote this year to fight what could be the end game. More on that next week. See you in the comments.
There may be surprises yet to come. Hillary is 100 pounds of shit in a 50 pound sack. Damaging information on one of several fronts could come out. For that and many reasons Sanders must stay in the game, or as close to it as possible
Eric:
That would be very bad news, in any case, not just for her. This election feels like it’s on a knife edge we haven’t seen before.
The way the Philippines went in their election last week, I am very very wary of a Trump victory. Maybe not directly from him but his supporters. The racist extremists have had a taste of permission with Mrs. Palin and will have full access to the feast with Trump in the Oval Office.
I’m an American citizen, but to them? Not by looks.
Eric,
From your lips to God/desse’s ears! Just as long as there is time for the Dems to correct course. Preferably before the primaries, but the convention will be fine. 🙂
I just wanted to offer this as food for thought; Fe, feel free to disagree and explain why, but I found it interesting:
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/how-to-explain-the-sanders_b_10206250.html
For those short on time, this is how one friend of mine distilled it into outline form:
Thanks Amanda!
Nothing to deny or confront regarding the writer’s points, but I do have to contest that Clinton hasn’t gone negative, Sanders has.
As to the 59% pledged delegate count, June 7th in New Jersey will be the telling tale. CA could be a mixed bag, though they’re polling 56% C 44% Sanders.
I will talk more in depth in subsequent columns about the June 7th aftermath, because we need to finish what was started. But there is a tangible reason why Sanders is placing second, and yet even though that means he loses, it still means his movement wins in waking up the Democratic Party and the DNC.
Not all voters who don’t support Sanders are idiots.
Some people do wonder how the loser decides how the superdelegates will vote.
What she said!
Here’s Markos Moulitsas (Daily Kos) on Sanders and the superdelegates:
“He’s benefited from low-turnout undemocratic caucuses”
Perhaps, but he has also benefited from high-turnout caucuses, too; Maine is the example that springs to mind. A “lily white” state, yes — but its largest city, Portland, was totally unprepared for the massive turnout made up overwhelmingly of Sanders supporters.
But we’re a small state with only a few delegates….
🙂
I think, if Planet Waves is going to have articles about politics, they ought to at least include some astrology references. Forgive me, but I don’t really care that much about Fe’s opinion. If you are going to continue to do this kind of reporting than the authors ought to be required to state which candidate they support up-front.
Karlie:
Not sure if you’ve followed my other columns in the recent past. But I have reported earlier that I am — reluctantly — voting for Clinton. She’s not my first choice, and neither is Sanders. My first choice was Elizabeth Warren.
We are in the middle of a political campaign and here and elsewhere around the world there are waves of change. There are times that the astrology will be cited in my columns, and I work directly with Eric, Len, and Barbara Koehler on the astrology when an astrological angle is needed.
I have been doing political blogging since 2003 — at the recommendation in 1999 by my astrologer, Eric Francis. My opinions on politics are guided by people I trust and know in the field from my direct involvement in politics since 1978.
If you are not interested in what I have to say, scroll down! There’s plenty of astrology to choose from here.
Cheers!!
Thank you for your respectful response. You’re writing is fine and, as I said, I don’t have a problem with you stating your opinion. I was more focused on the overall in what I understood to be presented on Planet Waves as an astrology focused site and not you personally. I stand corrected on Planet Waves policy to include non-astrological articles as Eric has now given me an earful.
hey karliecole — Fe did write a column a couple/few weeks ago in which she described her process of decision, and her reasons for getting behind Clinton as the Dem nominee — it had a lot to do with the legitimacy of the process, and the value of Sanders’ platform and supporters being integrated.
You don’t have to agree with Fe. But you also don’t have to read her column if it bothers you. Fe has been writing on Planet Waves for 8 years, and Eric has had non-astrological articles since the very beginning of Planet Waves. Not all the staff agree on the Bernie-Hillary issue, but we do all respect each others’ opinions and thought processes.
I say, if Fe’s stance leads to intelligent, informed conversation, that’s great. There’s plenty of room for difference of philosophy on PW — there just is not room for personal attack.
But again — if you’re not into what she’s offering, nobody’s forcing you to read. Seems pretty simple!
🙂
There was no personal attack in my comments. Just a comment and request for a statement of who the author is supporting which was not in this article.
Karlie, if you want to have an informed debate with Fe on here, great – go right ahead. But as Amanda said, Fe has been writing for us a long time – and her columns clearly show her progress in terms of where to lend her support.
Whom do you support?
My comment wasn’t about who she supports. It was, in part, a request for her to state who she supports since this is an opinion piece.
Here’s an interesting list of suggestions on how to change the primary process:
1. Get Rid of Debates.
2. Hold the Debates on Sunday Afternoons.
3. Get Rid of Caucuses.
4. Close our Primaries.
5. Change the way Delegates are Awarded and Seated.
6. Change the way Primaries are Scheduled.
7. Change the way Superdelegates Work.
The full explanations why are here in the full diary:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/30/1532511/-How-I-Would-Fix-the-Democratic-Primaries-and-Debates