Nevada Caucus: Obama Defeats Clinton, but Clinton is the “winner”
By now you’ve read that Clinton “out-polled” Obama 51-45 in Nevada; but would it surprise you to discover that Obama won more delegates to the convention than Clinton?
I’ve learned two things today. First, the Democratic presidential nomination system is not particularly democratic, since the system of delegate selection is different than the concept of one person one vote.
Second, I have learned that the national media is not actually covering the Democratic presidential nomination campaign. If the media was covering the Democratic presidential nomination campaign, then they would have projected Barack Obama as the winner of the Nevada caucuses, projected New Hampshire as a tie between Clinton and Obama, and declared that Clinton finished second in Iowa.
That is, after all, what actually happened in the Democratic presidential nomination campaign, which is based on delegates, not popular votes from states.
Instead of covering the Democratic presidential nomination campaign, the media is instead covering who wins the popular vote of individual states. While what the media is covering is interesting and closer to the concept of one person, one vote, it isn’t the Democratic presidential nomination campaign.
In fact, the 51-45 outcome doesn’t represent the percentage of the actual vote; not sure that anyone knows what that is.
P.S. Oh yeah: Romney’s win in Nevada is “less significant” than McCain’s win in South Carolina, even though Romney won more delegates yesterday than McCain.
This comports with the Iowa rankings, where Clinton — technically third by a hair — got one more delegate than second place Edwards.
Caucuses systems hearken back to our antebellum town hall meetings, or even the original city-states of nascent democracy in Hellianic Greece.
Somehow, I don’t think there would have been a Trojan War had ancient Athens had touch-screen voting. I think caucuses will be a quaint relic of the past within ten years.