Would someone PLEASE be decisive.
It’s going on and on and on.
I refer, of course, to Obama vs. Clinton.
Why couldn’t it have been different?
15 point win for Clinton and she’s properly in the game.
5 point win and she really should quit.
10 point win and nothing changes.
I know I’m not an American, but I have a few things that need to be said.
By March it was abundantly clear that Clinton couldn’t win without a miracle.
At the same time, Obama was going to struggle to get a clear win through delegates.
So, what was needed was some decisiveness.
Who should be decisive though?
The super-delegates. Isn’t that what they’re there for?
Instead though, they’ve just watched. And watched. And why are they watching? In case a miracle happens and somehow, Obama suddenly becomes totally unelectable.
Here’s the problem though: That was never going to happen.
As a result, the voting is dragging on and on and starting to seriously damage the chances of a Democrat victory in November.
From March to June NOTHING will change. Obama will have more votes, more delegates, and more states won. It was the case in March and it’ll still be the case in June. That was always going to be the case. Anyone with just a tiny bit of foresight could have seen that.
If the super-delegates could have just shown a tiny bit of ‘super-ness’ then this whole thing could have been sealed in March. and then the Democrats would be in an almost unstoppable position come November.
But no, they show no decisiveness and no foresight. And every day they hang about, needlessly watching and waiting ‘in case…’, they diminish Democrat chances in November.
(Here’s the Math’s behind why the super-delegates should just decide: http://www.slate.com/id/2185278)