Hillary Clinton’s 50 State Strategy?

Below is a snippet from Hillary Clinton’s new web site called DelegateHub.com . I find it awkward that she is talking about “honoring the spirit of the Democrats’ 50-state strategy” when she obviously and openly focused on a few large states and openly minimized Obama’s wins in lesser populated states. She surrounds herself with Democratic Leadership Committee (DLC) advisers that basically laughed at Howard Dean 50-state strategy when he launched his campaign in that manner. The 50- state strategy is why she is losing currently. Obama has way more field offices than her and has invested more in reaching the people than paying his campaign advisers

In addition, if she thought Florida and Michigan voters were so important why did she agree on the terms the DNC put forward to consequence these two states for moving their primaries so early? If she was so concerned she could of taken a stand on the issue. Now that she is looking for delegates to regain the lead she is now concerned for the voters in these two states? Interesting and very awkward.

———————————————–

Delegate Hub
FACT: Florida and Michigan should count, both in the interest of fundamental fairness and honoring the spirit of the Democrats’ 50-state strategy.

An important part of the debate over delegates is the role of Florida and Michigan. Hillary Clinton believes that the voices of 600,000 Michigan primary voters and 1.75 million Florida primary voters should be heard at the Democratic convention.

———————————————

Senator Clinton,

I find the above comment on your new web site to be quite awkward as you do not appear invested in a 50-state strategy. You have focused on large states that have a large number of delegates, like California, Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania. You have spent less time campaigning in the small states and have less field offices in these smaller states than your opponent.

I also find it odd that you are raising concerns for the voice of the citizens of Florida and Michigan to be heard now? I do not recall you making any issue of this when the DNC was purposing the consequences to these states for moving their primaries up too early. You also agreed with these consequences. Now that you are behind in delegates and you have won a majority of delegates in these two states, your are raising issue. This looks very suspicious.

In regards to super delegates (aka – “automatic delegates”), I respect the concept that the Democratic Party gives a voice to their party’s elected officials and activists. This does help ground the party so we don’t go way off base. I also believe that the party can not afford to totally ignore the voice of the majority of the people. We have two great candidates currently and we therefore need to support the candidate the the majority of the people are behind. Neither candidate will take us astray, so why promote the super delegates to settle the nomination and over ride the will of the people?

I firmly believe the party needs to hear the people. We are NOT the Republicans who follow their authoritative leaders in lock step. We are free thinkers the believe in small “d” democracy.

I wish you the best in the upcoming primaries and encourage you to get back to talking about the issues and not the process or the other candidate.

Respectfully,
Chip Royall
Tampa, FL 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s