Should Party Nominating Processes be Democratic? The Answer Seems Obvious, Because it is. Jakob Dylan Helps Clarify.
Should an American political party have a truly democratic nominating process? Or should party insiders and bosses select candidates?
It seems to be not only fairly obvious that a democratic nominating practice not only produces a strong candidate in a general election, but would be the ethically sound, democratic, and fair thing to do. But some dark forces are arguing otherwise.
Somehow, this piece in the New York Times argues that the process should become less democratic because "party bosses have more knowledge" of who is and isn't capable of potentially holding office. The authors of this NYT piece claim that part of our problem is the "insistence that parties be run democratically" and that there is "real danger" in holding fair elections. Excuse me while I vomit in disgust. It's true- the Republican party has a more democratic nominating process.
Reading this piece by less than admirable Democratic party members makes it clear that the party is everything but what their name implies. My NYT comment on the article is below. If we don't water our democracy, it won't grow, something that Jakob Dylan sings about below: