Bernie Sanders seems to have won in New Hampsire with about 60% to Hillary’s 38%, (with 89% of the vote counted). But at this stage of the race Hillary nevertheless already has 422 committed delegates and super-delegates, against Bernie’s 37. These people are committed to her because they think her candidature is inevitable and desirable. They could determine the outcome of the nomination at the convention.
Super-delegates, the great and good of the Democratic Party, ensure that undesirable or unelectable candidates cannot become Party’s candidate against a Republican nominee, and therefore possibly lose catastrophically in the general election. They exist because the establishment wants ultimate control. And yet what is actually happening now is that Bernie is attracting voters of all ages and genders, while Clinton is not coming across, even to women, as a good candidate. (It has to be pointed put that the super-delegates, while committed now, are allowed, in theory, to change their votes. It also has to be said that Bernie may not turn out to be so popular in other parts of the country).
But why is this post on an Epicurean blog? Because the Democrat great and good clearly don’t trust the voters, and seek to get their way against the wishes of the people. Not very democratic. Add to that the activities of the current political class in general in voter suppression, gerrymandering and kow-towing to special interests and you get the current situation, where most people want a total change in the system, more accountability, more security, more happiness and more peace of mind. Notwithstanding the views of Epicurus himself about politics, you cannot ignore the environment you are in. The delegate system is but a symptom of what has gone horribly wrong.
It’s interesting that the Republicans don’t have super delegates, only Democrats. It’s also interesting that in Iowa, the Republicans published the popular vote, the Democrats didn’t. I’m not saying that the Republicans are defenders of democracy; if they were, they should be advocating compulsory voter registration, proportional representation and Sunday voting. But Democrats who attack alleged Republican assaults on democracy ought to look in the mirror first.
So far, Bernie has won more delegates as a result of elections than Hillary. Iowa was a virtual tie, and New Hampshire a resounding win. In New Hampshire especially, he won across all demographic groups, and just as much amongst moderates as amongst liberals. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it-gets-harder-from-here-for-bernie-sanders/. He also did better amongst independents than with Democrats, suggesting that he is more electable. But I’m afraid I remain pessimistic about Bernie’s long term prospects. In addition to the horrifying prospect of super delegates being almost entirely agianst him, he has to fight Super Tuesday, where big money is necessary to compete in lots of states simultaneously. There’s also the prevailing conservatism of the Southern states. While its true that most Southern conservatives have switched to the Republican party, the Southern Democrats are still notably more conservative than the party nationally. My only hope would be that as a result of Bernie’s win in New Hampshire, Hillary has positioned herself so far to the left, that she is no longer distinguishable from Bernie- who would be able to mobilise liberal voters but Hillary wouldn’t necessarily be able to mobilise her more moderate supporters because she would have alienated them.