1976? Do I hear a 1976? According to Rep. Loretta Sanchez, as many as half of the House Democrats may indeed vote for Hillary Clinton during the state by state roll call since allowing the vote was decided last week. I don't want to rock the boat, but come on! Let's have it out!
Hillary getting votes and making it a re-do of the 1976 contested convention between Ford and Reagan would be ridiculously exciting — and give the 1,800 delegates Hillary earned a real voice at the end of the road — a redemption of sorts from the seven-year-long campaign we've been through. A return to purity if you will. Karl Rove has laid out a whole plan on how to win a contested convention, let's do it?
As I'm sure many of you, lots of superdelegates disagree with me, and are a little squirmy about the vote. To see why, read more.
Under the convention bylaws, delegates have a mandatory duty to register their votes on a tally sheet with the convention secretary so everyone will know who Hillary'd and who didn't. According to a former delegate counter, “By putting her name in nomination, you’re putting people on the spot.” Others would prefer to cast their vote for the obvious nominee but feel beholden to reflect the vote in their districts. (Imagine that.) On staffer commented on her boss’ position: “My boss is conflicted about it – and pissed Hillary is putting us in this position.” Still, 30 to 40 percent of the New York delegation will go for Hillary.
Is this "convention about nominating Barack" as one Democratic delegate says, or is it about really making a decision? Could a contested convention be the best and fairest culmination of a race so close, or should the convention just be a formality?