14. The California primary had been winner take all for years
No one had talked seriously about changing it until right after McGovern won. Then the party establishment went into crisis mode.
As a matter of fact, it really should have been proportional all along, but it would be wrong to change the rules after the game is played. That is what the editorial in the OP wants to do.
There was reason to be concerned about a McGovern candidacy in 1972, as the election results showed. That was 1972 and this is 2008. What's the point now? Barack Obama is no George McGovern. He's going to kick ass and take names in November.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
