Quote

From the beginning of the presidential nominating conventions in the 1830's really through the 1950's, you had conventions that actually did real business.

Originally, the main purpose of the convention was to determine who the party would have as the presidential nominee and the vice-presidential nominee.

So the result was that as one approached a political convention for most of the 19th century and for most of the 20th century until the 1960's, part of the drama was the fact that you didn't know ultimately who was going to be the nominee at the end of that convention week.

The initial attraction of a political convention was that often the outcome was not preordained. There was at least some element of surprise. But, now it's like tuning in to a movie where you already know the plot and the ending. It's just not that interesting.

Party machinery is not a fortuitous development, but is the direct result of the requirements of practical politics. The necessity of nominating candidates for offices leads inevitably to the development of caucuses and conventions.

I chaired the 1982 Democratic Party Commission on Presidential Nominations that created certain automatic delegates to the Democratic convention - the 'superdelegates.' It was a good idea then, and it is still a good idea.

The voters of the country decide who they want to support, and the delegates are elected to also make a determination of who would be in the best interest of the party and the country to be our nominee.

President Bush and his commanders announced early in the conflict that the Conventions applied.

I'm never going to become an expert on how you get delegates. I think what you've got to do is follow the will of voters.

There are many hands touching ballots after a voter drops his ballot into the ballot box. There is no guarantee of ballot secrecy for anyone, which makes the whole system vulnerable to intimidation and bribery.