Another Electability Argument Regarding Caucuses
It's generally recognized that caucus results are less representative of a state's voters than primary results. Their curtailed voting hours and the lack of early voting, absentee or mail-in voting ensures it. But they count for choosing pledged delegates, so that's water under the bridge.
When it comes to electability arguments for the superdelegates, however, I think there's something they need to consider -- that caucus results vastly undercount one particular segment of voters who will vote in big numbers in the general election: The elderly and infirm, including nursing home residents who weren't mobile enough to attend a caucus but who can vote by absentee ballot in primaries and the general election.
If unable to attend caucuses, and most likely were, their preferences were excluded. This is one more reason I don't think that a superdelegate can equate a caucus win in a particular state with a win in that state against John McCain in November.
The Democratic party needs older voters this year more than ever against John McCain. And they have been coming out in primaries for Hillary. Statistics on our 37 million residents over age 65, 1.9 million of whom live in nursing homes, are below:
|< More Support For A Unity Ticket | John Edwards to Endorse Obama in One Hour >|