OCR Text |
Show pi-:oi'i,i: oi: nossios. Why continue t h o old method of I'iirly con vi'iil ions for the selection of c:i itdidnle i for I ho presidency? Why not lot the voters of a party record their own choice of a candidate candi-date at tin; party primary and have Hie result certified by the county clerk to the national committee of that parly, instead of sending delegates dele-gates at iiroat personal expense to a convention to any what their constituents consti-tuents have already said? If some such law could be enacted enact-ed we would be rid of the iniquitO'Us conv'ent.iotv rule entirely, an'd. un-crupulous un-crupulous delegates would no longer be able to dicker and trade and effect ef-fect secret .convbinatiotis for their own personal gains, as we strongly suspect is frequently the case. The f ranters of the constitution intended that every voter should enjoy en-joy a free and inalienable right to an expression of his choice in the selection se-lection of public officials. It was not intended that his choice 'should be warped and twisted by party chiefs behind closed doors, as is too often the case under the convention system. Here is an example. A dozen or so men may be running iflor the nomination within a certain party. One of these men may receive re-ceive a greater number of all the votes cast at the various primaries than any other condidate. It would seem that in all f.mness he she.ilr: bo entitled to th.-j nomination. If not, why ask the people to express a choice at all? Yet in the convention, because of the large number of candidates and the numerous scattering votes, he may be one or two votes short of the necessary MAJORITY of all votes cast by the delegates. If he is unable un-able to entice the delegates of some other candidate away from their allegiance, al-legiance, he loses the nomination. And right there is the weak plank in the whole convention structure. struc-ture. It lets the bar down for all kinds of dickering and bartering and selling of delegate votes, possibly resulting re-sulting in the nomination of some unkown quantity whom the people do not want at all, .but whom the bosses 'think they can control if he is fortunate fortun-ate enough to win the election. Of course, to abolish the convention conven-tion system would deprive the party chiefs and bosses of their control of the nomination, and possibly of their control olf patronage after election. But chiefs and bosses are few, while the common voters are legion. Why should the few override the wishes of the many in this presumably presum-ably free country? Why be boss ridden when we can just as well be self governed? Why not let the people be the people, instead of being pawns of men who think of themselves first, of votes next, and of their country last eff all. |