You dont understand what I am saying, if black people vote for a black candidate doesnt make them racist, because thats been far and few in between for a viable black presidential candidate. Black people have always voted for white candidates, in every presidential election. Also in 2004, Bush increase his vote among the black community significantly so the race thing is thrown out the window. As you can recall once upon a time, the Republican party had the black vote, until the Dixiecrats become Republicans. However, my point is that if Hillary Clinton steals the nomination somehow, she will lose the black and young vote. If she wins it fair and square, she will get both of those votes, to unite the party.
Steal is a word that I use, but I will explain my logic. If it appears that the will of the people was overturn in order to give her the nomination. She is constantly trying to change the rules, for the nomination. First she says its the superdelegates, then popular vote, she claims. Now its the electoral college, she is arguing up. The rules are whoever has 2025 delegates win the nomination. She claimed to be the best candidate from the start, she thought it would be a cakewalk. Now she is saying, why cant he put her away. Well why didnt she put him away in the beginning. This has been a poorly run campaign.
The whole idea of the democratic party adding the super delegates in the first place was so that the democratic party leaders would also have a say in the nomination, not just election year caucus attendees and the rank and file democrats. The notion that super delegates MUST vote along the same lines as the ordinary delegates goes against the very reason for their existence. If party leaders choose to exercise their authority to vote for the candidate that would best represent the party, it does NOT constitute either candidate "stealing" the nomination.
whos the say that the whole idea is a good one. Its very flawed and the people who voted will feel like something was taken away from them. Also, why have the people vote then, if that was the original idea, why not just let the superdelegates decide the entire nomination process. Its really not a full proof system.
Fool proof? It's the system that the Democratic party chose well before the campaigns and everybody knew what it was for. The last nomination had the party saddled with a liberal candidate from Massachusetts who was unelectable in a national race. It happened in 1984 and 1988, too. The party honchos decided that they need to be able to influence the nomination from the standpoint of the national party.
