Debate One of the United States Presidential Elections, the Republican

 

The initial debate for the Presidency of the United States was supposed to present the Republican candidates. This was accomplished by Fox News but not if all you watched was the prime time debate with The Donald, The Bush, and the other eight candidates. Wait, you exclaim, aren’t there seventeen candidates? True, but for the other seven, the second tier candidates determined from the average of five polls taken up to about a month ago were put on before prime time and scheduled so their debate would not bore anybody with their skills. That was unless you were former Ohio Governor John Kasich who was thrust onto the stage with the other first tier candidates without having even been listed in the five polls as nobody even realized he would run. Fair or not, he waited until the Friday a week before the first debates to declare he was in, but the debate was being held in Ohio; so out with Texas’s former governor Rick Perry and in with the man from Ohio as one must respect the location over the locution. So, for those who were expecting to see how Rick Perry might compare with Huckabee, Christie, Paul (Rand, not Ron), Rubio, Carson, Walker, Cruz, The Donald, The Bush and by location over locution as he had hardly said anything other than I’m running and I’m the hometown boy, gotta love me, Kasich; you were out of luck as he was on with the presumed also-rans who were on before you got home from work as why would anybody care about the underdog seven. I am aware that you can and will hear all about the first tier candidate debate and I can give you my synopsis in a couple of sentences with a lot of comas or whatever follows in my brief and somewhat unique views. The vicious and venomous questioning, especially by Megan Kelly, focused on The Donald from the opening question where the ten were challenged to declare by not raising their hands that they were not going to run as an independent if they were not the Republican candidate. Everybody who has an ounce of sense or had paid even a modicum of attention already knew The Donald had stated such might be an alternative if he felt he had been cheated from a fair and even shot at the Republican candidacy. Well, congratulations Fox, you took the first step in making sure that The Donald has solid proof he was treated very differently and cheaply with targeting to make him look as bad as humanly possible. They also ignored Ben Carson for most of the debate and the questions were relatively sophomoric and too much time was spent to show the erudite and beautiful people of Fox and less so the Candidates. So the main debate mostly proved that The Donald will apparently be targeted with every possible cheap shot even to include every potentially embarrassing moment or every demeaning comment, especially if they were made towards a woman, or bankruptcy of one of his many firms which failed and declared in efforts to make The Donald look like some monster from the political black lagoon. The rest of the main debate did little to enlighten and was to me a disappointment, especially after witnessing the first half of the debates which was conducted in a more casual and far less acidic or vindictive manner and by being so more informative. There was no pitting of one candidate against another to maximize animus between the candidates and just simple questions which did not always require or receive simple answers. So, on to the so-called junior varsity.

 
 

Republican Debate #1
The Donald, Bush, Kasich, Huckabee, Christie, Paul, Rubio, Carson, Walker, Cruz, Perry, Carly Fiorina, Pataki, Jindal, Gilmore, Graham, Santorum

 
 

The second seven was presumably to be led by the recently demoted Rick Perry included in the order given by the CNN recap so the order is not mine, Carly Fiorina, George Pataki, Bobby Jindal, Jim Gilmore, Lindsey Graham and Rick Santorum. Some of these candidates gave exactly what those who follow politics fully expected and there were a few presumed surprises. Rick Perry was sporting his new ‘Geek’ eyeglasses which have been critiqued as improving his appearance giving him an intellectual appearance and making him look so much more serious. I might disagree on the better look but if he is going for a more Geek Squad look may I advise having a pocket protector, driving a black and white two tone VW bug (the new variety) and maybe on occasion to show his fighting spirit some white tape on the bridge of his new black rimmed glasses. Other than the new look, his performance was better but not the most polished of the candidates with uncomfortable pauses which perhaps some might call intellectual pauses while others might call them fumbling for how to phrase his answer half-way through his response. Much of his performance was quite adequate but not stellar or overly exciting. His debate performance did provide competence and we did not have anywhere near his listing the three departments he would terminate immediately after he walked into the Oval Office, the Department of Education and unlike Governor Perry I cannot even remember the other two, he only missed one but my excuse is it is four years later. In all honesty, he would have fit comfortably in the later debate but may end up being better served for being with the smaller field and getting more response time and higher quality questions without the gotchas.

 
 

Next up, Rick Santorum, a known entity, was questioned pointedly as to whether he thought that he had had his time and perhaps he should retire from the field instead of running again. His answer was equally pointed pointing out that despite many media and other forces made his candidacy an uphill struggle not mentioning the fact that the win they had referred to in Iowa as a win was carried in the media asking what he was going to prove after losing Iowa when in reality it was announced a month later after the actual counting was completed that he had won Iowa at which point such coverage of who won Iowa was relegated to yesterday’s news after a brief mention of the actual count. Rick Santorum was upbeat and positive and showed his usual casual manner which has charmed people and showed his warm nature combined with a down to earth common sense which also makes people feel comfortable and relating to him especially when meeting him personally.

 
 

Bobby Jindal was excellent and shone brightly. He answered the questions posed him knowledgably and with an erudite vocabulary which might even pass muster with Bill O’Reilly. I have high hopes that Bobby Jindal will be in the top tier for the next debate and hope he is still around for March 1, aka Super Tuesday. Should he continue his level of performance, then he should be pretty much guaranteed to not only make it to Super Tuesday but potentially well beyond. I was pleasantly impressed with Bobby Jindal.

 
 

We can cover Jim Gilmore, former Governor of Virginia, and Lindsey Graham, Senior Senator of South Carolina, together as both were adequate and bland and unimpressive. Lindsey Graham would have been far more impressive if he did not have a long history which explained why he has worked so well with Democrats in the Senate, he often could almost be caucusing with them and sometimes his cooperation to go along to get along attitude makes him a dangerous candidate as the Republican base will largely stay home should he be the Republican candidate. Jim Gilmore was simply without spirit or excitement and a perfectly calm and overly responsible candor which will likely not grab the attention of voters but the early primaries will determine that for both men.

 
 

George Pataki, former Governor of New York, was even headed whose seeming biggest claims were to have lowered crime and turned around the state of New York and having been Governor of New York during the September 11, 2001 terror attacks on the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and a fourth jet which was brought down by the passengers preventing it from reaching its target somewhere in Washington D.C. The problem is that in a debate should he make those same claims any Democrat opponent would accuse him of claiming the gains which actually were almost exclusively due to improvements made in New York City by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and that would be the talk of the town for the rest of the campaign and the media would sink him over accusations he was attempting to mislead people over his accomplishments.

 
 

Lastly, Carly Fiorina who is the former CEO of Hewlett Packard. I will freely admit that I had extremely high expectations of Carly Fiorina even before the debates. From the majority of reports of her appearances she had wowed audiences wherever she appeared. She was said to be informative, well briefed, real and most of all comfortable before the people and gracious with her time when answering questions. Her weakness was her unknown political status as she has never held political elected office and was chosen for the position of CEO of Hewlett Packard which is not exactly an elected position but one where an election of sorts is taken to select one for such a position. Some of my readers had also alerted me to keep her in mind, so that had whetted my appetite even more. I must say I was satisfied and then some. She answered as if she had been in politics all her life with a calm assurance and steady calm tones of a polished professional, but then she was a professional with plenty of speaking engagements. Her story of her experience and how she eventually gained the position of CEO at Hewlett Packard where she has told she started as a secretary at a at a nine person real estate firm and worked her way from there into the CEO spot, something extraordinary and unbelievably impressive. I would be very happy for the last two standing to be Carly Fiorina and Bobby Jindal and believe a final debate between just these two would be able to raise money for the eventual winner’s campaign by selling tickets and having it as a pay per view on cable TV and also on the internet. When it comes to trading barbs with Hillary Clinton I have a feeling that Carly Fiorina would almost relish the opportunity. If she does not make it to the top of the ticket, maybe after Biden or Sanders or whoever defeats Hillary and has Clinton as their running mate, that would be sufficient reason for the Republican candidate to have Carly Fiorina as their running-mate if only for the setup of the woman on woman debate of the century.

 

 

 
 

Is it too much to ask that we have a Fiorina-Jindal ticket in either order, please?

 
 

Beyond the Cusp

 

The Sad Truths About American Election 2016

 

The one constant around the world is that everywhere one hears discussions about the upcoming 2016 American elections and the talk immediately turns to the potential Presidential results and how they will either improve or ruin the plans of our leaders, nations, areas, threats, trade or economies. The truth is that trying to divine the thoughts of the American public and how they will vote for in the Presidential elections is complete folly, especially if one is using the relations between in foreign affairs as their criteria. While across the globe the United States foreign policy or lack thereof is of vital importance and in many instances potentially critical and even deadly, the American public usually cannot see any further than their wallet. Yes, there are numerous Americans who understand and even use a fair degree of foreign policy knowledge and positions of Presidential candidates, I must sadly report that when we left the United States that number decreased and even with our presence in the voting booths the people voting their wallets probably outnumbered foreign policy wonks by a thousand to one if not a hundred-thousand to one. This is why the Presidential debates only have one which presumably is advertised as pertaining to foreign policy. The truth is that most of the questions end up actually being turned inside-out, upside-down and twisted all around until it actually sets the candidates attentions to foreign situations as it pertains to the effects it might have on the budget or social programs at home. Still, the choice of who will be the next President of the United States will have a determining effect on every part of the globe; it will just be whether it will be for better or worse. So, what should we seek as far as the most preferentially positive effect generally around the globe?

 

The usual rule of thumb is that a Republican President will be more involved in foreign policy than a Democrat President. This does not necessarily mean this is preferential as it also depends on whether the Republican President has advisors and other assets which drive a thoughtful and thoroughly researched foreign policy or if they have a more seat of the pants reactionary policy. An example of the former would be President Dwight David Eisenhower who though often derogatorily called a do nothing President actually was responsible for the reconstruction of Europe and the Far East policy after the fall of Japan and much of the American ascendance after World War II all while the United States enjoyed some of its best economic growth years in its history. Another President who also did well largely due to advisors was John Fitzgerald Kennedy whose advisors were very knowledgeable and who when tested by Russian President Khrushchev over the Cuban Missile Crisis set a strong and potentially dangerous posture of no nonsense strong response that eventually led to the Soviet Union to retreat from Cuba removing their missiles. Kennedy also answered the Soviet initial success and leads in the start of the space race to set the goal as the Moon and challenged the American space industries and NASA with, “We choose to go to the Moon! … We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” On the other hand, the United States has had Presidents from both parties who were unmitigated disasters when it came to foreign policy though I will not shame any by naming them and instead allow each to choose their own examples. From the juncture where many currently observe the two Administrations under President Obama, these could easily be defined by numerous presumably traditional friends of the United States, who would, if choosing to be totally candid, would describe these as total disasters with potentially the worst yet to come. Then there are some of the worst mischief makers and oppressors or would be conquerors who likely would heap praise on President Obama’s choice to not challenge anything which might prove challenging or potentially difficult and demanding taking a principled stand.

 

So, first off, let me assure those who might be misled into believing that the Americans generally have begun to awaken and see what a disaster President Obama has been for the world as a whole, if it were somehow made possible for President Obama to run for a third term, the American public would likely reelect him and even the Jewish voters who might claim that Israel is one of their top concerns would still vote for President Obama by an easy majority likely near to sixty-five percent against thirty-five percent voting Republican. Actually, there would be a sizeable percentage of the Jewish voting public who would refuse to vote Republican and simply stay at home which is the same as voting for whichever candidate proves victorious. With this established, this fact does not bode well for the Republican Party if the American public, which is made predominantly of ‘low-information voters’ who vote pretty much as they are advised by such criteria as, my family have always voted Democrat/Republican/Whig (OK, most families who had voted for the Whig Party have moved on since then), what’s his name on Comedy Central/Saturday Night Live/the Late Show/Family Guy/South Park character, Media such as ABC/CBS/NBC/FOX/CNN/PBS/MSNBC, print media, favorite personality/close friend/boss at work/union boss or whatever ridiculous source even to include Tarot Card reader’s advice, are the mainstay of the voting public which as time has passed has become more the norm. This is partly why the politicians fight over voting rules such as removing people from voter rolls through validation techniques to remove those who have moved, died or not voted in decades or the need for picture identifications, motor voter laws, and even register to vote outside the polling place and then enter and vote or permitting prisoners to vote even from death row as there is no area not pursued as a voting base that the party who thinks something is to their advantage will not use to the utmost of their ability. So, we have established that the American voting public is not necessarily the pure cerebral and reasoned public which Thomas Jefferson, Sam Adams, or James Madison envisioned, though probably Benjamin Franklin may have had the right attitude and worldly experience to realize how far the electorate would eventually slip. So, now what?

 

The next is choosing who will most likely be the candidate for each of the two major parties. Let us start with the Republican Party and the myriad of candidates there seeking to be the candidate chosen to represent the party in the elections in November 2016. The one thing we are assured is that the Republican candidates will mostly be breaking what President Ronald Reagan called the Eleventh Commandment, do not speak ill of thy fellow Republicans. The Republican candidates will refuse to bow out until it becomes mathematically impossible for them to win the nominations and some even then will continue just in case they can make a surge from out of the blue once the delegates are freed to vote however they choose, usually around the fifth ballot or later. With all the candidates, and a fair number of top ties candidates, it is quite likely that the Republican Party may reach its convention without any one candidate with sufficient numbers of delegates to win on the first or second ballot and there may be five candidates who are all actually closely matched in candidate count with none even remotely close to a majority or even a resounding plurality. This might lead to a lengthy and harshly fought convention which will go into the fourth day or beyond without reaching some resolution or producing a candidate. There appears now that Jeb Bush will have a loyal set of establishment delegates and the ‘movers and shakers and moneyed establishment supporting him while the Tea Party and Christian Right will be divided amongst a core of select candidates including but not limited to Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Dr. Ben Carson and Scott Walker; with the likes of Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Bobby Jindal will all have a base of support which may be sufficient to retain their hopes and finally there is Carly Fiorina who as the sole woman, might receive additional support as she is the only candidate against whom Hilary Clinton would not have the advantage of gender running to be the first American female President. The end result is whoever eventually survives the scathing attacks and fevered battle with the nomination may find themselves limping into the actual Presidential election race as damaged goods sorely injured by their own party. Oddly enough the one person who might mostly escape such infighting and scorn from their fellow Republicans might be Carly Fiorina simply because should she avoid falling prey to the gotcha media assaults most Republicans face, she could be the one without any damaged armor and slide between the barbs and arrows and prove the strongest candidate of them all and take the nomination with minimal damage and able to rally the Republican base and establishment as she belongs to neither but can make overtures to both.

 

That brings us to the Democrat Convention and the presumed coronation of Hillary Clinton as the ‘deserved one,’ the ‘chosen one.’ From the very beginning I have not believed that Hilary Clinton would survive to become the Democrat Party Presidential candidate in 2016 or ever as if she is cast aside this time it will be for good. Hillary Clinton’s most formidable and undefeatable opponent is Hillary Clinton of campaigns and offices past which will eventually make her untenable as a candidate. Her time as Secretary of State will tie her inexorably to President Obama’s disastrous foreign policy and much of the blame for President Obama’s failures will be heaped upon Hillary and she will be unable to escape this baggage. Additionally there will be the baggage from the entire Benghazi debacle, and even worse, her hearings before the Congress where the immortal words were uttered never to stop echoing in many ears where Hillary, referring to four dead Americans including two men whose heroic efforts became known making the inaction simply unacceptable and un-American and now forever tied to her stating, “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?” The absolute cynicism of her caustic remarks and the bald faced attempt to brush off any responsibility and to make any questions in this area as improper as that the reason for the hearings was not about those who gave their lives presumably in service of their country and for a mission which originated within the State Department, but to allow Hillary Clinton to be cleansed of any wrong-doing and to be vindicated and be lauded for striving to assure that such a situation never again presented such a deadly situation. The line of questions seeking to pinpoint blame was, in Hillary’s mind, completely out of bounds. Between Benghazi, the e-mail scandals, the missing records, scrubbed and sanitized memos and communications, Clinton Foundation contributions and influence peddling from her position as Secretary of State, foreign monies which likely were derived as payments for favors, the rise of Blumenthal communications concerning Libya where he had business interests while advising Hillary Clinton during her time as Secretary of State as well as numerous other scandals yet to surface, and Hillary Clinton is damaged even beyond the capability for the Democrat Party to attempt to repair her to make her presentable to the public. All the baggage which has been in the mainstream news about Hillary Clinton was originally being exposed now early in the process and before she announced her intentions to run for President such that it could be labelled old news already beaten to death if brought up during the campaign by the Republican side. The problem is that there seemingly is no end to the scandals as they just keep jumping out from everywhere. As the media and Democrat operatives keep attempting to put these scandals to rest and tie up all the loose ends they run into another problem and then a scandal which follows as night follows day and there is no putting this to bed as more and more loose ends keep appearing and the Hillary apologists are beginning to become somewhat short tempered as their patience dies. In the end Hillary Clinton and former President William Jefferson Clinton will be required to hang up their hopes of returning to the White House until Chelsey is old enough which will be fairly soon, so they should get her elected to some office, governor of the state of their choosing, Maryland sounds easy as does Massachusetts.

 

So, with no Hillary as their candidate, who can the Democrats turn to as their best bet? There are a number of people which have been mentioned as potential replacements should Hillary self-destruct. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley though his having also been Mayor of Baltimore might be a slight drawback, Vice President Biden who has a history of foot-in-mouth disease but actually would be solid in foreign policy as even if a threat he made in a speech by his going off-script the adversary would never know for sure whether or not Old Joe might actually follow through. Bernie Sanders has also declared his interest and though we agree on very little I admire his forthrightness and honesty which are very admirable qualities and he can be counted on to do what he says and say what he means. Then we have Andrew Cuomo and Howard Dean who both are known for mouths beyond their control, Al Franken also has given a definite maybe which is quite comical as well as noncommittal though he and Biden debating would make for great comedy, and finally Ms. Elizabeth Warren whose credentials, or lack thereof, are equal to those of President Obama when he took up the mantle of Democrat candidate for President with a few critical differences making her worthy of a deeper look.

 

Though Senator Elizabeth Warren has claimed she is not running, this may not be left as her choice as she has a sizable supportive following without ever overtly seeking such. She is a far superior believer in the true Progressive way of which President Obama campaigned upon in his initial 2008 campaign. She is well spoken and needs little prompting from any crutches such as a teleprompter. Senator Elizabeth Warren is quick on her feet, knows what she believes and is very comfortable in stating her views unequivocally and with great passion. She is a strong supporter for individual rights though she does appear to place too much emphasis and burden upon government for protecting individuals from failure by providing a broad and sweeping system of safety nets and she does not appear to be adverse to a guaranteed minimal wage for everybody whether they be employed or not. She favors Obamacare with some modifications making it more workable, not less dependent on government as her adjustments would bring Obamacare closer to a single payer health plan than as it currently sits. Senator Elizabeth Warren is a believer in Keynesian economics where the government is the principle engine behind the economy. She also is opposed to free trade much of the time claiming instead to stand for fair trade which she has not fully explained. She is a through and through socialist progressive and like Bernie Sanders says what she means and means what she says and always sticking to that exact path. At least she would not produce any big surprises as the Democrat candidate or a President if successfully elected. Her largest area which is unfortunately untested and unknown is foreign policy. Here she would be untested and undefined and until such could be filled in she should not be taken as a serious candidate. But as I explained, foreign policy is the last and least of things on the average American’s mind so it is quite likely that with her populist political talking points and her appeal to those dependent upon government Senator Elizabeth Warren would likely gain a large popular appeal and could breeze to the Democrat nomination once Hillary Clinton realizes she had already failed and failed miserably, but it remains to be seen if she will even be willing to be dragged thus appearing to have the nomination and run in the primaries thrust upon her rather than actively sought. Though I have little in common with Senator Elizabeth Warren’s viewpoints and fear her lack of foreign policy experience or even exposure, I find that she would have little problem being elected as the next United States President, her biggest obstacle would be attaining the Democrat nomination and that is something remaining to be seen. The final note is that the next President of the United States will be the one who emerges as the victor in the Democrat nomination and only give the Republican candidate a one in three chance at winning the general election. But there is still a race to be run and we have to have the race just to prove every prognosticator to be so wrong it is embarrassing.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Santorum Wins, Newt Soldiers On, Romney Still in the Lead

The first report I heard this morning on last night’s primaries in Alabama and Mississippi along with caucuses in Hawaii and American Samoa just had to mention Mitt Romney after referencing any of the other candidates. It went something like this; Santorum won both southern primaries in Mississippi and Alabama while Romney came in a competitive third also coming in behind Gingrich. Romney swept the caucuses in Hawaii and American Samoa. Santorum will pick up around forty delegates while Romney will garner fifty. Gingrich coming in second will add over thirty delegates to his count leaving Romney still comfortably in the lead.

 

The main themes of the news last night appeared to be that despite winning both primaries, Rick Santorum was still going to lose ground because of the delegates being assigned in the Pacific Islands. It was further pointed out that Rick Santorum can only win should Newt Gingrich leave the race and that possibility was hashed out until after Gingrich spoke showing all indications of continuing to the bitter end. This slid the conversation to how Mitt Romney winning the nomination was now guaranteed and an overly long string of attempts to rationalize the reasoning behind Newt Gingrich remaining in the race. I thought maybe I might share my insights on the rest of the Republican delegate race heading for the Convention.

 

I have a little difference of opinion with the so-called experts and pundits about Gingrich remaining in the race will solely work to thwart any chance for Rick Santorum to win the nomination outright. The reasoning for this line of thinking is based upon the primary belief that almost every vote won by Gingrich would have otherwise been a vote for Rick Santorum. I find this a difficult point to swallow. While I will grant that very likely three fourths of the Gingrich support is diverted from Santorum with fifteen to twenty percent are taken from Romney, the remainder very probably would have sat out the primaries. Some of my thinking has been due to the fact that in many states the numbers of votes being cast in the Republican Primaries have been higher than the average as the race is tighter and more competitive and thus stirring up increased participation. The real question is what is Newt Gingrich thinking which has him believing that he can actually win the nomination?

 

My theory has it that Newt Gingrich does not believe he is going to win the nomination any more than does Ron Paul. Newt also resembles Ron Paul in that he believes he is the only candidate representing his views which is a vitally necessary message which must be professed no matter what the consequences. I suspect Gingrich has another reason to remain to the bitter end, and that is because he believes that he and Santorum together can garner sufficient delegates to prevent a first round nomination of Mitt Romney thus leading to that mystical political state, a bartered convention. Should the Republican Convention end up unable to give any of the candidates over fifty percent of the vote, then the bartering and maneuvering begins. If the divide is such that Romney has less than fifty percent, say forty-five percent, with Santorum a close second at say thirty-nine percent and Gingrich holding fourteen percent with Ron Paul holding the remaining 2 percent, insufficient for Ron Paul to put anybody over the top. This places Newt Gingrich in the spot of king-maker as whoever he backs would easily win with their delegates added together. My suspicion is even more absurd as I can easily envision Newt Gingrich presenting himself to the Convention as the sole candidate not destroyed by the process as both Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney had focused their aim on each other leaving Newt safely on the sidelines away from the mud-slinging.

 

For those who claim that the only result that can come out of Newt Gingrich remaining in the race taking most, but not all, of his votes and delegates from supporting Rick Santorum thus keeping him from winning outright have overlooked a small matter. My thought is that when Mitt Romney falls short of the necessary delegate count we will find that this will be due to the small but still measurable number of votes and delegates stolen away by Newt Gingrich and simply having the votes he took away from Santorum being insufficient to have put him over the top anyways. So, it is possible that it will be better for Santorum to have Gingrich in the thick of things instead of dropping out of the race. Finally, should we end up with a brokered convention, actually a convention that goes past the first vote casting before reaching a nomination, it is more likely that Rick Santorum would be able to enlist the support from Newt Gingrich than would Mitt Romney. The drawback would be that after a certain number of ballots have been held, some states release their delegates from their elected obligations allowing them to vote for whoever they choose. This would very likely lead to the so-called Republican elites making the decision on who would be the candidate. Even if this was not the real reason for a Romney win, it would be suspected should he not have reached the magic number of delegates through the primary process and a perceived back-room deal appeared responsible for a Romney candidacy. Such a perception would weaken Mitt Romney’s campaign from the outset which might affect the outcome of the national election in November. The best result for the Republican Party is for one candidate, whichever one is less important than the manner, to win the nomination outright through the primary votes and not reliant on super delegates or other non-elected delegates being the deciders.

 

Beyond the Cusp