This message was self-deleted by its author

[SheilaT]

4. No primary, or a very cursory sort of one

with no other contenders would be so incredibly wrong. As much as I am very opposed to Hillary Clinton as our nominee, as much as I think she's a truly terrible choice, what's even worse is that she have no competition, nothing that would serve to focus what the party really wants. She is not already President and running for re-election. She's not looking for validation of what's she's already accomplished. She was rejected in 2008, and she really ought to go out there all over again and convince people she really is the best choice.

If she is nominated, especially if there is no real competition at any point, then the best we can hope for is 1, the Republicans nominate one of their real crazies, and 2, that even more Republicans stay home than Democrats. I predict an appallingly low turnout. Heck, I live in a reliably Democratic state, so my not voting won't matter. When I used to live in a reliably Republican state, Kansas, I often thought of not bothering to vote. What I hate most about the Electoral College is that the majority of votes really don't count under that system. Actual direct election of the President would change things a lot. And for the better, in my opinion.