Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2016-02-16 7:08 PM |
Subject: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic I know I saw this or a reference to this in another thread but I thought it deserved it's own thread. So after two states have voted in the DNC primary, Hilary barley squeaks out a win by a narrow margin in IA and gets beat like a red headed step child in NH and it's this close 394 delegates for Hillary and Bernie is leading with, oh, no wait, no Bernie only has 44.delegates? How can this be? This is the party that stands for fairness, yet, this is them leading by example, or not. Democracy, it doesn't look like it to me. Please defend this if you can Democrats? Non D types, what do you think of this?
Edited by crusevegas 2016-02-16 7:10 PM |
|
2016-02-16 8:56 PM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Meh. If it meant keeping Cruz and Trump out of the White House, I'd sign up for ritual human sacrifice as part of the nomination process. |
2016-02-16 9:26 PM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Meh. If it meant keeping Cruz and Trump out of the White House, I'd sign up for ritual human sacrifice as part of the nomination process. Are you offering yourself up as the sacrifice? |
2016-02-16 9:26 PM in reply to: 0 |
Master 5557 , California | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate ... is why. Fair? Maybe, maybe not. But keep in mind that a primary is just a choosing process done within the confines of one party. So if you want those superdelegates, you need to play ball with what the party wants and walk the party line. In this case, that's not Sanders, who until last year was happy to call himself an independent. Edited by spudone 2016-02-16 9:28 PM |
2016-02-16 9:39 PM in reply to: spudone |
Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by spudone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate ... is why. Fair? Maybe, maybe not. But keep in mind that a primary is just a choosing process done within the confines of one party. So if you want those superdelegates, you need to play ball with what the party wants and walk the party line. In this case, that's not Sanders, who until last year was happy to call himself an independent. I wish I hadn't used the word fair in my OP. I was wanting to focus on the term democracy. It comes across to me as hypocritical that the party called democrats play off their primaries as a "democratic" process. |
2016-02-17 7:08 AM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Meh. If it meant keeping Cruz and Trump out of the White House, I'd sign up for ritual human sacrifice as part of the nomination process. Are you offering yourself up as the sacrifice? Meanwhile, your entire GOP house is in flames, burning to the ground, the giant propane tank that is Donald Trump is on the verge of exploding, reducing your home to splinters, and you are, in effect, looking over the fence and criticizing your neighbor because their lawn is a little unkempt. |
|
2016-02-17 10:33 AM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by crusevegas Meanwhile, your entire GOP house is in flames, burning to the ground, the giant propane tank that is Donald Trump is on the verge of exploding, reducing your home to splinters, and you are, in effect, looking over the fence and criticizing your neighbor because their lawn is a little unkempt. Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Meh. If it meant keeping Cruz and Trump out of the White House, I'd sign up for ritual human sacrifice as part of the nomination process. Are you offering yourself up as the sacrifice? I don't think the people who tend to vote GOP are in a house that's burning. I think the establishment in the GOP is already running for their lives, but not the voters......and I think there is a difference. I don't know if it will translate into votes and the Presidency or not.....that remains to be seen......but I think you may underestimate a very large segment of the population who is tired of being told there is something wrong with them. They're tired of the constant protests and PC that everyone feels they are entitled to these days. If they do actually go vote it could bear a result that you don't see coming. |
2016-02-17 11:57 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by crusevegas Meanwhile, your entire GOP house is in flames, burning to the ground, the giant propane tank that is Donald Trump is on the verge of exploding, reducing your home to splinters, and you are, in effect, looking over the fence and criticizing your neighbor because their lawn is a little unkempt. Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Meh. If it meant keeping Cruz and Trump out of the White House, I'd sign up for ritual human sacrifice as part of the nomination process. Are you offering yourself up as the sacrifice? I don't think the people who tend to vote GOP are in a house that's burning. I think the establishment in the GOP is already running for their lives, but not the voters......and I think there is a difference. I don't know if it will translate into votes and the Presidency or not.....that remains to be seen......but I think you may underestimate a very large segment of the population who is tired of being told there is something wrong with them. They're tired of the constant protests and PC that everyone feels they are entitled to these days. If they do actually go vote it could bear a result that you don't see coming. Maybe. The article I posted from the LA times quoted someone who said he was "voting with his middle finger". The thing is, I don't think any of those people voted Democratic in either of the last two elections. So it is largely a fracture within the GOP, one that I think will push a lot of left-leaning republicans towards the Democratic Party. If the choice is a religious zealot like Cruz or an unpredictable prima donna like Trump, either Hillary or Sanders look pretty good by comparison. |
2016-02-17 12:11 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by Left Brain Maybe. The article I posted from the LA times quoted someone who said he was "voting with his middle finger". The thing is, I don't think any of those people voted Democratic in either of the last two elections. So it is largely a fracture within the GOP, one that I think will push a lot of left-leaning republicans towards the Democratic Party. If the choice is a religious zealot like Cruz or an unpredictable prima donna like Trump, either Hillary or Sanders look pretty good by comparison. Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by crusevegas Meanwhile, your entire GOP house is in flames, burning to the ground, the giant propane tank that is Donald Trump is on the verge of exploding, reducing your home to splinters, and you are, in effect, looking over the fence and criticizing your neighbor because their lawn is a little unkempt. Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Meh. If it meant keeping Cruz and Trump out of the White House, I'd sign up for ritual human sacrifice as part of the nomination process. Are you offering yourself up as the sacrifice? I don't think the people who tend to vote GOP are in a house that's burning. I think the establishment in the GOP is already running for their lives, but not the voters......and I think there is a difference. I don't know if it will translate into votes and the Presidency or not.....that remains to be seen......but I think you may underestimate a very large segment of the population who is tired of being told there is something wrong with them. They're tired of the constant protests and PC that everyone feels they are entitled to these days. If they do actually go vote it could bear a result that you don't see coming. While I agree on Cruz......and I see no way he could win the Presidency, I don't agree with Trump. The fact that he is an outsider, is willing to bash the media (lord knows they've got it coming), and doesn't seem to care who he offends, resonates with people who don't feel like they have a voice right now. The loudest voices are coming from the left in the form of protests, etc.........but there is a very large segment of the population who is sitting back, with really nothing to protest about, watching business as usual from politicians and the media, thinking their time is coming to be heard. (the media won't even cover them because they are so afraid of Trump getting elected) I have no idea if there is enough of them to help elect a President, but it'll be interesting. And I think there are plenty of Democrats who won't vote for the liar.....at least among the Dems I know.
Edited by Left Brain 2016-02-17 12:14 PM |
2016-02-17 5:10 PM in reply to: crusevegas |
Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Just for background: I routinely vote split-ticket after researching my ballot & don't consider myself tied to any party. To answer your question: Superdelegate angst is much ado about nothing. You have to remember the superdelegates have not actually voted yet. Superdelegate math is fake math right now. The superdelegates who have announced their intentions are doing nothing more than giving an endorsement at this point...just like the UAW or NRA might back a certain candidate to try to persuade voters to do the same. If the general voters rally behind Sanders & he wins a majority of the pledged delegates, the superdelegates will fall in line. The superdelegates who hold elected office will vote for the winning nominee or for whoever their district/state voted for (for fear of being voted out of office) & the majority of the rest won't risk turning voters against the party in the general election. The superdelegates shouldn't play a role this year unless something catastrophic happens (medical/legal/etc) to the presumptive nominee before the convention takes place. |
2016-02-17 10:41 PM in reply to: crusevegas |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by crusevegas I know I saw this or a reference to this in another thread but I thought it deserved it's own thread. So after two states have voted in the DNC primary, Hilary barley squeaks out a win by a narrow margin in IA and gets beat like a red headed step child in NH and it's this close 394 delegates for Hillary and Bernie is leading with, oh, no wait, no Bernie only has 44.delegates? How can this be? This is the party that stands for fairness, yet, this is them leading by example, or not. Democracy, it doesn't look like it to me. Please defend this if you can Democrats? Non D types, what do you think of this?
Hey Cruse, it's the Party system. Just google what the RNC did after Ron Paul's strong showing a few years back. Rules got changed to make it less likely an outsider could succeed. I'm really not making it up. Check it out. Both parties do it. Just watch...Trump or Cruz may have more votes in the primaries/caucuses, but just watch, dollars to doughnuts an establishment candidate will be the GOP nominee coming out of that convention. My money's on Rubio. I'm not saying it's right, it just is what it is. |
|
2016-02-23 6:23 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Originally posted by crusevegas Hey Cruse, it's the Party system. Just google what the RNC did after Ron Paul's strong showing a few years back. Rules got changed to make it less likely an outsider could succeed. I'm really not making it up. Check it out. Both parties do it. Just watch...Trump or Cruz may have more votes in the primaries/caucuses, but just watch, dollars to doughnuts an establishment candidate will be the GOP nominee coming out of that convention. My money's on Rubio. I'm not saying it's right, it just is what it is. I know I saw this or a reference to this in another thread but I thought it deserved it's own thread. So after two states have voted in the DNC primary, Hilary barley squeaks out a win by a narrow margin in IA and gets beat like a red headed step child in NH and it's this close 394 delegates for Hillary and Bernie is leading with, oh, no wait, no Bernie only has 44.delegates? How can this be? This is the party that stands for fairness, yet, this is them leading by example, or not. Democracy, it doesn't look like it to me. Please defend this if you can Democrats? Non D types, what do you think of this?
So, if one party does it are you saying it's not big deal so long as the other party does it to? Not being a member of either party and one who thinks the core of both parties is the root of our nations ills. It truly disturbs me who they are able to manipulates the game and nobody gives a ##@&&. |
2016-02-23 6:51 PM in reply to: crusevegas |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic In reality the primary process isn't a democratic process. The democratic process is the election in November where we get to choose who we want (from the nominees). The parties do have their primaries to get an idea of who the people want to run, but similar to the talk of a "brokered convention" on the Republican side they could ignore a majority Trump vote and nominate Sarah Palin (for JMK). It's kind of weird and I agree it's not very democratic but it is what it is. Now from a blowback standpoint if Trump gets a significant majority of delegates and they try to usurp him, there will be big problems because there's no way his supporters get behind somebody else and he'll likely go third party. I feel this is why he keeps tossing out there the idea of running third party to simply keep the RNC in line. Historically, the primary process has been similar to WWE. There's a big show with lots of ups and downs, but the winner was selected before it ever got started. However, in 2004 Obama came in from the top ropes and wiped out the "pick" and Trump is schlonging the field on the RNC side this year. Vince McMahon is not going to be happy. |
2016-02-23 6:53 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Originally posted by crusevegas Hey Cruse, it's the Party system. Just google what the RNC did after Ron Paul's strong showing a few years back. Rules got changed to make it less likely an outsider could succeed. I'm really not making it up. Check it out. Both parties do it. Just watch...Trump or Cruz may have more votes in the primaries/caucuses, but just watch, dollars to doughnuts an establishment candidate will be the GOP nominee coming out of that convention. My money's on Rubio. I'm not saying it's right, it just is what it is. I know I saw this or a reference to this in another thread but I thought it deserved it's own thread. So after two states have voted in the DNC primary, Hilary barley squeaks out a win by a narrow margin in IA and gets beat like a red headed step child in NH and it's this close 394 delegates for Hillary and Bernie is leading with, oh, no wait, no Bernie only has 44.delegates? How can this be? This is the party that stands for fairness, yet, this is them leading by example, or not. Democracy, it doesn't look like it to me. Please defend this if you can Democrats? Non D types, what do you think of this?
Your guy Rubio better start winning some states if he is going to win. It's kinda tough to get the nomination through technicalities when your support is in single digits and you don't win a single state primary. hehe |
2016-02-23 8:32 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Subject: RE: Democratic Party,,,,, NOT very democratic Originally posted by tuwood In reality the primary process isn't a democratic process. The democratic process is the election in November where we get to choose who we want (from the nominees). Agreed on the Primary process, for both. I disagree that the presidential election is democratic. For instance when a strong 3rd party candidate runs it's quite likely that 40ish% can pick the president, not a majority of the people, It's quite possible a higher percentage of the people would prefer one of the other two than who was actually elected. Originally posted by tuwood The parties do have their primaries to get an idea of who the people want to run, but similar to the talk of a "brokered convention" on the Republican side they could ignore a majority Trump vote and nominate Sarah Palin (for JMK). It's kind of weird and I agree it's not very democratic but it is what it is. Now from a blowback standpoint if Trump gets a significant majority of delegates and they try to usurp him, there will be big problems because there's no way his supporters get behind somebody else and he'll likely go third party. I feel this is why he keeps tossing out there the idea of running third party to simply keep the RNC in line. Which is what prompted my OP on how close the votes have been and how far ahead Billary was in front of Bernie. That would certainly be fun to watch though. Originally posted by tuwood Historically, the primary process has been similar to WWE. There's a big show with lots of ups and downs, but the winner was selected before it ever got started. However, in 2004 Obama came in from the top ropes and wiped out the "pick" and Trump is schlonging the field on the RNC side this year. Vince McMahon is not going to be happy. I've gotten to the point where I'm concerned about our country but yet to the point where I almost don't care what happens. |
Democratic debate Pages: 1 2 3 4 | |||
IRS To Tea Party: Sorry We Targeted You And Your Tax Status Pages: 1 2 3 4 | |||
Ricin Guy - TEA Party Member Pages: 1 2 |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
|