California Latino Super Delegate Remains Uncommitted

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Steven J. Ybarra, JD

A few weeks ago, when Patty Solis Doyle was dumped to make way for the new effort to save the dying Hillary campaign, I said that to do that was dumb. At that time, it was clear to me and many folks that the Clinton campaign was losing its grip. Texas was supposed to be in the Clinton column and suddenly it came into play. On Tuesday March 4, 2008, the campaign magically revived itself with a slim margin of victory. Not quite the thirty points we had all been promised but hey, it was on the plus side.

I have always said that early voting does nothing for turnout. Early voters are those with time on their hands. Moreover, it appears that while I was right about Texas being within the margin of error (that means 4 points either direction) I remain right about early voting. In the early voting numbers, Obama led in Houston two to one. Nevertheless, by the time the paper storm had cleared. Obama’s lead went from two to one, to 56.15%. He ended with very few votes on Election Day as compared to the early vote. He closed the day with 227,886 votes to Clinton’s 176,724 votes.

On Election Day, Clinton picked up 100,000 votes due to the efforts of her 300 paid staffers that she put in the field the last seven days. The clear win on Election Day was due to a real effort by a bunch of scared people - not the least of who were the candidate and her husband. In the Ohio primary, at the end of the day only 229,905 votes separated first from second place.

However, on the absentee side of the ledger, the number will not be in proportion to the previous elections because Ohio, like California, has made absentee voting available on demand. Ohio elections officials estimate that the number will be between 25% and 30% of the total number of all voters. [Keep in mind the turnout in the Ohio primary for all voters was only 42.8%. In the general election in 2004, 71% of all Ohio voters voted.]

So here is the question of the day - what does a “Super Latino” (i.e., super delegate to the Democratic National Convention) like me do when it comes convention time? (Mind you, I got the title “Super Latino” from the New York Post; it’s not just an ego thing.)

I am opposed to the primary caucus system. They are by their very nature unfair to working class people and discriminatory. This is why they were set up in the first place. One of the questions that I constantly ask is why is it that 200,000 white folks in Iowa get to choose my presidential nominee? Oh, we are told, but you got Nevada, and there are a lot of colored folks in Nevada. My response is of course yes for those who could get off work or had the time. They got to participate.