On Tuesday April 26, I had the pleasure of reading an opinion column by Anita Raychawdhuri regarding the New York state Democratic primary. Her argument was interesting and well-thought out. However, I disagree with a substantial majority of it. Raychawdhuri believes the Democratic Party to be flawed in its handling of the election and the candidates, and I am here to dispute that.
Firstly, I admit there were troubling issues in the election. Voters purged from registration lists and technical issues with voting must stop and be addressed. However, they do not make up the core of Raychawdhuri’s argument which instead focuses on closed elections and superdelegates.
Regarding closed races, Raychawdhuri writes, “It is silly to have primaries that are open to voters of one party. It privileges candidates affiliated with the ‘establishment’ who are usually less appealing to independent voters.” Of course it does. This is the Democratic Party primary, not the Independent Party primary. The people of the Democratic Party want a Democrat elected, not an independent. Having a registration deadline might be mundane and bureaucratic, but anyone identifying as a Democrat should have a vested interest in making sure their candidate represents Democratic views, not Independent or Republican views. I do not mean to offend non-Democrats, but this was the Democratic primary and therefore it is an election for Democrats. Save the open race for the general elections.
Raychawdhuri posits that the six-month deadline is too long because people wanted to see Bernie Sanders’ viability before registering. His viability shouldn’t matter. If you support him then register. If you want to vote, then register. Waiting accomplishes nothing.
Raychawdhuri also believes superdelegates are undemocratic. I believe the opposite. They actually ensure the most popular candidate gets elected. Why would “party-elites” want a candidate who runs without the majority of the party’s support? That’s asking to lose an election. Superdelegates are not bound to candidates and historically always vote with the candidate who wins the popular vote (winning the election and not the popular vote is rare but possible). This is why superdelegates shouldn’t be considered pledged to Hillary Clinton.
They are an election “safety-feature” that ensures a candidate can’t be nominated without the majority of the party electorate’s support. If the Republican Party had a similar system, Donald Trump’s campaign would be very different. He has significant Independent support, but not the support of a majority of traditional Republicans. Should he get nominated he will most represent people who otherwise wouldn’t be considered Republicans. It is no surprise that many “establishment” Republicans seem horrified. They are, in effect, losing their representation within their own party.
Instead of changing these rules, Independents should support third party candidates. Sanders and Trump have proven that non-establishment candidates have the independent support and financial capacity to run successful third party campaigns. Our commitment as voters to only two parties and our reluctance to support others is the real problem with this election.
Nicholas Serrao is a sophomore majoring in economics.