This year’s election caucuses and primaries are exposing our political system for what it is — an outrageous, corrupt folly [“Conventional wisdom,” News, April 25].
Our elections are supposed to result in the candidate the majority of the voters want. If politicians in the Republican Party can change the rules because they don’t like a candidate, creating a loophole that alters the outcome of the popular vote, then what does this tell the citizens of this country about their votes? It tells us that our votes will be ignored to satisfy the politicians.
This is why people hate American politics and politicians. The only rule should be that if a candidate receives more votes than the others, that person wins.
Gary Soccorso, Wantagh
As a person who came of age in the 1960s, I’ve witnessed a few campaigns and elections. The delegate math adds up for Hillary Clinton only if Democrats are willing to lose the general election [“Is Bernie Sanders a hypocrite?” Opinion, April 24]. If not, the party of Clinton needs Sen. Bernie Sanders more than he needs the party.
If the November contest is Donald Trump vs. Clinton, I can see a “yuge” number of voters who will not be able to figure out which of those two is the least offensive. If it’s Gov. John Kasich vs. Clinton, I can easily see moderates and independents gravitate toward the kinder and gentler Kasich rather than the newly progressive Clinton. Also, if it’s anyone other than Trump vs. Clinton, it’s easy to imagine Trump and Sanders running independently in a four-way race.
In every one of these scenarios, the real progressive has a distinct advantage because, unlike the rest of the field, most people actually like Sanders and his unadulterated desire to alter the status quo.
I’m not the only American who’s tired of holding my nose in the election booth; I will vote for someone this time, even as a write-in. That’s the math that the candidates need to consider carefully.
James Moyssiadis, Mount Sinai