<p>To the DNC and all USMedia Outlets:</p><p>The superdelegate count has, in the past, not been handed presumptively to one candidate. Now the media are piling onto a new policy of preemptively assigning all but a tiny few to Clinton, even though a large plurality have publicly stated they are uncommitted, and in fact any or all of them could change their minds at any time. Assuming Clinton has all but 23 superdelegates locked down, the media has unfairly made Sanders' campaign look hopeless, which discourages people from voting for him. What is the motivation? In the attached video, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, admits that superdelegates exist to protect the establishment from "grassroots activists". Perhaps we should change the name of the party from "The Democratic Party" to "The Status Quo Party". But what about the media? What are they afraid of? Is it possible that Fox News is sure Clinton would be easier for the Republicans to beat, so they do their best to make Sanders' path to nomination look more impossible than it really is? Whatever the motivation is, this practice is new, it is wrong, and it must be called out for what it is.</p><p>So stop including uncommitted delegates in the reported delegate counts for the primaries. It ain't over 'til its over!</p><p> </p>
↧