Here's how the Democrats select delegates:
"Delegates and Alternates must be equally divided between men and women.
The delegate selection process is open to all Democrats who are registered voters. The SC Democratic Party encourages participation by members of groups that are underrepresented in party affairs, including African Americans, Hispanics, ethnics, youth, those over 65, gay men and lesbians, persons with physical disabilities, and persons of low and moderate income.
Our goal is to elect a delegation that is at least 50% African American, as well as at least 3 GLBT delegates and 5 who are under 30. The election of At-Large delegates may be used to reach this goal."
The party of equal opportunity selects by race, sexual practice and age. Why not simply select the best people?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Because too often the "best people" turn out to be white and male ... regardless of whether or not they are really the best people.
It's not the "best people"; it'w the people voted on by members of the party.
THAT's democratice, IMO.
Hmmm ... by those standards, Bush lost in 2000, and we would all be better off.
Obviously the system is not "purely" democratic, nor does it pretend to be.
I'm sure we'd all be better off with Gore and all his global warming hysteria.
But I was referring to party politics. Period. And pardon my typos.
Why yes, yes we would.
Why would you limit your "complaints" (for lack of a better term) solely to the way the party political structure works? I.e., if you feel a direct vote works best at the state party level, why wouldn't it work best for the full national election as well?
Effectively, in the national election we do something similar by giving extra "preference" or "weight" to less-populated states.
Post a Comment