They are not good reasons for the Party to nominate someone who attains that number.
Screw it, why bother with primaries and delegates at all if you don't nominate the person who obtains the official number? Why not just flick a coin or give it to Clinton?
The serious answer is we hold primaries and caucuses to obtain valuable information about the voters and the candidates, and we would be wise to consider all the information we obtain in the process - not just the information which favors one candidate and/or ignores some voters.
Yes, the Democratic Party makes rules and sometimes breaks rules. Rules are important, but they aren't always good for us, and they should never be allowed to cripple our nominee by enabling their nomination with less that a majority of the Party behind them.
I see no good reason to award the nomination to Hillary Clinton unless she manages to get the support of at least 2,209 delegates at the National Convention. Likewise for Barack Obama.
You are hilarious - in a banner year for dems, highest turnout in years for a primary season, two great candidates, you think we should nominate neither? Hilarious.
