Archived Posts » 59,821,464
delegates voting against the people?
5/6/2012 8:18:34 PM
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
5/6/2012 8:21:05 PM
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
5/6/2012 8:22:03 PM
Originally Posted By 103:
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
Yeah Im just saying. It's pretty messed up that that is even possible.
5/6/2012 8:28:42 PM
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
Yeah Im just saying. It's pretty messed up that that is even possible.
Originally Posted By 103:
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
Yeah Im just saying. It's pretty messed up that that is even possible.
I agree somewhat. The reality is that most people don't take the time to learn how the system works beyond "I vote on X-day and CNN tells me who 'won' my state."
Local and state organization is incredibly important to a primary race. It's one of the big reasons Santorum never really had a chance. His organization was beyond horrible. Romney has amazing organization followed by Paul. The real vote is what happens in local parties. The vote takes place then. And it's open to all members of the party (so far as I know). But most people don't know about it.
5/6/2012 8:35:19 PM
How about majorityof the popular vote takes all delegates? I think only two states don't have that rule. A candidate from Commiefornia can win 51% of the popular vote and still gets all 55 delegates. The larger states aren't supposed to have more say than smaller ones.
5/6/2012 8:38:10 PM
Most states you vote on the candidate and then vote for your choice of delegates. At my precincts caucus the Bachman, Santorum, Perry and Romney backers all left after the first vote was taken. They couldn't be bothered to vote on delegates to the county convention. In many states that Romney has "won" his campaign didn't even have delegates available to be voted for.
5/6/2012 8:44:33 PM
Its called a republicanism.
When you have a direct democracy where everyone can push a button and vote we end up with the socialism we have today.
If we had a system where people who actually care and learn about the process and are willing to jump through hoops to do what is right then maybe we would get better representation.
When you have a direct democracy where everyone can push a button and vote we end up with the socialism we have today.
If we had a system where people who actually care and learn about the process and are willing to jump through hoops to do what is right then maybe we would get better representation.
5/6/2012 8:51:23 PM
The GOP primary process in caucus states works pretty much exactly the same way our government works in general. We go to the caucus, choose delegates, those delegates do party business at the county and then state and then national conventions. The results don't have to, and really shouldn't necessarily exactly reflect the straw poll results, if they did in all cases Al Gore would have been president.
What's happening now is no different than what Reagan did in '76 and many other candidates and a couple presidents who successfully pulled it off have done in our history, it only seems odd to us because over the last few decades since they've been televisied the conventions have become more of a campaign spectacle than an actual function to debate and determine party policy and conduct party business, which is actually part of the problem with our party IMO.
Re Santorum's organization (and Gingrich's too, and Cain and Bachmann and everyone else for that matter) this has been driving me crazy for the last six months, the media has been distracting everyone with one hopeless cause after another, none of those candidates ever had the slightest chance at the nomination because they did not have the organization to even field delegates and meet ballot requirements. It has always been a Romney coronation with the longshot Paul as the only alternative.
I must admit I'm pleased with all the superdelegates, bylaws and committee appointments liberty candidates have achieved, they've had way more success than I ever expected, going to win five states too, it's amazing.
What's happening now is no different than what Reagan did in '76 and many other candidates and a couple presidents who successfully pulled it off have done in our history, it only seems odd to us because over the last few decades since they've been televisied the conventions have become more of a campaign spectacle than an actual function to debate and determine party policy and conduct party business, which is actually part of the problem with our party IMO.
Re Santorum's organization (and Gingrich's too, and Cain and Bachmann and everyone else for that matter) this has been driving me crazy for the last six months, the media has been distracting everyone with one hopeless cause after another, none of those candidates ever had the slightest chance at the nomination because they did not have the organization to even field delegates and meet ballot requirements. It has always been a Romney coronation with the longshot Paul as the only alternative.
I must admit I'm pleased with all the superdelegates, bylaws and committee appointments liberty candidates have achieved, they've had way more success than I ever expected, going to win five states too, it's amazing.
5/6/2012 8:56:49 PM
A certain candidate is getting delegates elected, even in the home state of the "other" candidate.
5/6/2012 9:03:52 PM
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
Want your vote to count? Get involved.
I did. I'm going to the state convention here in a few weeks. I'm going to vote in sharp contrast to the 'will of the people' that you're whining about.
Guess what? Anyone who doesn't like it could have went with me. They didn't. Four hours of my time a week ago, plus a day later this month, and I'll accomplish more politically than all the posts you've ever posted in GD.
That's how it works. I didn't like the system. I got involved.
5/6/2012 9:08:28 PM
Originally Posted By arowneragain:
Want your vote to count? Get involved.
I did. I'm going to the state convention here in a few weeks. I'm going to vote in sharp contrast to the 'will of the people' that you're whining about.
Guess what? Anyone who doesn't like it could have went with me. They didn't. Four hours of my time a week ago, plus a day later this month, and I'll accomplish more politically than all the posts you've ever posted in GD.
That's how it works. I didn't like the system. I got involved.
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
Want your vote to count? Get involved.
I did. I'm going to the state convention here in a few weeks. I'm going to vote in sharp contrast to the 'will of the people' that you're whining about.
Guess what? Anyone who doesn't like it could have went with me. They didn't. Four hours of my time a week ago, plus a day later this month, and I'll accomplish more politically than all the posts you've ever posted in GD.
That's how it works. I didn't like the system. I got involved.
5/6/2012 9:39:17 PM
Originally Posted By arowneragain:
Want your vote to count? Get involved.
I did. I'm going to the state convention here in a few weeks. I'm going to vote in sharp contrast to the 'will of the people' that you're whining about.
Guess what? Anyone who doesn't like it could have went with me. They didn't. Four hours of my time a week ago, plus a day later this month, and I'll accomplish more politically than all the posts you've ever posted in GD.
That's how it works. I didn't like the system. I got involved.
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
Want your vote to count? Get involved.
I did. I'm going to the state convention here in a few weeks. I'm going to vote in sharp contrast to the 'will of the people' that you're whining about.
Guess what? Anyone who doesn't like it could have went with me. They didn't. Four hours of my time a week ago, plus a day later this month, and I'll accomplish more politically than all the posts you've ever posted in GD.
That's how it works. I didn't like the system. I got involved.
This man gets it.
5/6/2012 9:53:32 PM
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
San someone explain to me how it is seen as a good thing that delegates are supposedly going to ignore the primary vote results? That's kinda some fucked up shit in my opinion even if I would like the result of it.
I think they are going to switch votes if for some reason Romney falls short of a majority, once enough votes have taken place to free their votes; it's either that or they will basically pledge their votes however the candidate they represent wants on the first ballot. I can't remember how it works. In the former case, the latter also takes place, but on the third ballot, I think.
5/6/2012 9:56:17 PM
Originally Posted By 103:
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
Because that's how it works? It's almost absurd to me that people think they have a right to vote for a primary candidate. It's a party picking a candidate. If people want that vote to be a right, the primary system will have to be altered completely.
The real vote is NOT what we do when we go to our precincts and check off a name. The real vote happens as the local and then state conventions.
More and more I'm actually going in favour of a caucus system as the standard, with delegates to the national convention chosen based on the desires of the delegates minor which themselves are representative of individual precinct majorities or pluralities.
5/6/2012 10:00:50 PM
Delegates Aren't people?
