This message was self-deleted by its author

[Purveyor]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Purveyor) on Fri Mar 18, 2016, 11:41 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[liberal N proud]

1. Then why the fuck go through the primary process?

What a fucked up response to the fact that you don't like the guy who is winning

[woodsprite]

11. For them, it's GOP Kabuki theater.

Unfortunately, it might be a bit like that for us as well with a number of lobbyists as Superdelegates.

[snooper2]

21. They asked that in the video, why have the primaries? The guy said, that is a good question

ROFLMAO-

Watching repukes destroy themselves is AWESOME!

[mwooldri]

29. They could do what true Tories do...

and let the Republican members of the US House and Senate vote on their candidate and they can decide for us. Cheaper, quicker, somewhat democratic.... blocks all outsiders from having a shot (i.e.

That is how (until recently) UK Conservative Party leaders were chosen.

[MADem]

31. It provides the voters an opportunity to "input" into the

decision making process as members of the party in question.

When they start opening primaries, though, it gets away from the parties. That used to be an advantage to parties to "plus up" their voting rolls--now it's starting to be regarded as a problem.

Many people are too young to remember how it used to happen. It's a new thing, relatively speaking, in terms of our nation's history, that We The People have ANY input at this stage of the game.

Previous to this, "we" weren't invited to participate in the process at this stage at all. And those people who were black, female, or didn't own property, way back when, why, they had no clout at all at any stage of the game!

[serbbral]

55. I agree

It seems like a waste of time. Lord knows I do not want Trump as the President, but fair is fair.

[harun]

57. To make people get invested in the process.

Then bait and switch em.

[AzDar]

2. The Dems are attempting the same thing, aren't they?

[Kingofalldems]

3. Short answer: No

[Matt_in_STL]

4. Dems certainly do offer the possibility of overturning the will of the voter

Just because it hasn't happened to this point, doesn't mean it can't via superdelegates. If we were always going to go with the will of the people, why have superdelegates?

[Crepuscular]

6. spot on

Superdelegates are designed to make sure that the ultimate nominee is the candidate that the establishment wants, which may or may not be the candidate supported by the most number of voters.

[Sky Masterson]

12. I predict that the GOP will incorporate Superdelegates after this Trump debacle

.

[Crepuscular]

15. I'm not sure

that there is going to be a GOP after this Trump debacle!

[Sky Masterson]

17. From your lips to Carl Sagans Ears.

[840high]

38. .+10

[Sgent]

53. Almost all superdelegates

are elected officials though, so in a way voters chose them as well. Indirect democracy is still democracy.

[Plucketeer]

10. Indeed!

And they have a whole ARMY of allies in the damned liberal media. They've got TOO MUCH invested to trust the outcome to simple-minded voters!

[840high]

39. Media, Debbie.

[geek tragedy]

18. No, it's Bernie's campaign that is lobbying superdelegates to steal the

nomination for him since he's going to lose the pledged delegate race.

[Octafish]

45. Today's Really Big Talking Point.

Direct from Rachel Maddow and her GOP guests.

[Dr. Strange]

56. Some are.

Super delegates don't "represent people" I'm not elected by anyone. I'll do what I think is right for the country

[Javaman]

5. LOL this will go over real well. LOL

the trump morons will do all they can to make sure the republican party vanishes from the face of the earth of trump isn't nominated.

there will be blood.

[Angry Dragon]

7. off with their heads

[riderinthestorm]

8. Yup, that's actually true. That's why there are super delegates and that's their job nt

[n2doc]

9. Yeah, go ahead, Curly...

I'd love to see the destruction of the Republican Party in Cleveland. I'll bring the marshmallows if someone brings the chocolate and graham crackers. The weenies will already be there.

[Shandris]

13. Then that is the textbook definition of Tyranny.

If the will of the people who choose representatives is not followed, then they are not representatives. That makes them feudal lords, with each having control over a small area, in vassalage to the ones over them.

[restorefreedom]

24. +1000000 nt

[reACTIONary]

42. I'm not sure that a party's rules...

.... can make for a tyranny . After all, anyone can run as an independent regardless of party. And hey, I think the rethugs should run an independent against their nominee !

[C Moon]

14. They're going to have to live with Trumpenstein: if they don't make him the nominee,

they'll be hard-pressed to get a decent turnout in the GE.

[Crepuscular]

16. I'm not convinced that

the Republican establishment really cares if they get a decent turn-out in the GE. I suspect that many of them behind closed doors would be much more comfortable with a Hillary presidency then a Trump presidency, which says a lot about the insular nature of the established political class in Washington D.C., irrespective of party. Trump poses a threat to the political establishment, as does Sanders, to a lesser degree. I'm convinced that the political elites see thwarting those threats as a greater need then winning the presidency. But maybe I'm just a cynic.

[reflection]

22. Agreed.

In fact I could see the big money that would normally go to the Republican candidate get behind Hillary in the event that Trump pulls off the nomination.

[restorefreedom]

25. the uniparty would rather hillary than trump.

as long as the lobbyists keep their job and corporate gracy train keeps flowing, all will be well in the oligarchy

[reACTIONary]

43. They might front an independent chalkeger....

..... they could support hillary without really supporting her and put the Lumpkin repubkins in their place.

[dbackjon]

54. It is not so much that they would be Hillary fans

But Hillary is someone that they can unite the party against.

Trump will destroy the party from within.


They are willing to sacrifice 2016 for the long-term health of the GOP.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

33. If Der DrumpFührer is not GOP nominee, then he will go 3rd party rogue

He's got a big enough delegate count now to feel that he is a "winner", that he owns the nomination. That and his yuge ego will make him break his 'promise' to not go 3rd party. But since when is his word worth anything, those times when it vaguely approximates sense?

[IdaBriggs]

40. The "sore loser" rules mean he wouldn't be on most ballots.

Slate had a nice explanation about it.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

41. Ah, thanks for reminding me. I read something about that. . nt

[Bernardo de La Paz]

35. If TheRump is the nominee, RNC might go 3rd party rogue on itself with Kasich.

It's one scenario apparently being discussed.

[0rganism]

19. LOL! go ahead, you gank that nomination Mr. Senior GOP Official

let's just see how that plays in the general
how you going to keep Mr. Trump from running an indy campaign and shredding your dwindling support even further?

[magical thyme]

20. both parties should do it. it will dry up contributions from the little peons

and open the floodgates to independent runs.

[One_Life_To_Give]

23. And Congress writes the Laws not the voters

But not listening to the will of the people is a good way to find yourself out of office in a hurry. Like it or not for either party going significantly away from what the people have voted for would be disasterous. You might as well tell the voters to FOAD as you are like "Al Haig" in charge.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

26. Just so all of you know, BTW, if Kasich ends up the candidate, you do understand he

is a radical rightwinger who would be a complete nightmare for this country, right?

[rock]

27. The parties are corporations

And not government bodies. They're like clubs and can have rules which they establish, like most other clubs. So technically the guy is right.

[Aksarben]

44. People don't seem to understand this

Party primaries are not public elections. They are the decision making process of private organizations. If those organizations decide that people with no relationship with the party except that they pick up a ballot every 4 years should not be deciding for the private organizations, well...they can do that. Don't like it? Get involved with the party. And that means more than voting in the primary

[Octafish]

46. Oh. So THAT's what happened to democracy.

We the People have been outsourced.

[rock]

48. This is just the party's way of deciding who to run

The general election is the official government run election which is more or less a democratic process in which the people's votes decide who the electors (and therefore the elected) are.

[Octafish]

49. The Founding Fathers Tried to Warn Us About the Threat From a Two-Party System

WashingtonsBlog, July 7, 2011

EXCERPT...

John Adams said:

There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.

George Washington agreed, saying in his farewell presidential speech:

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

SOURCE: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/07/the-founding-fathers-tried-to-warn-us-about-the-threat-from-a-two-party-system.html

Seeing how the wars never end while the rich get richer and the middle class morphs into the poor, administration after administration, decade after decade of trickle down money trumps peace; it may be they have a point.

[Jim Lane]

47. The parties are not completely private organizations.

Their role in the election process makes them subject to some regulation. For example, the "white primary" during the Jim Crow era was defended on the basis you suggest, but the defense failed. The white primary was held unconstitutional. The segregationist Democratic Party in the Southern states was not allowed to exclude blacks from its primaries.

[Wednesdays]

28. The battle lines are being drawn

We're not far away from total civil war within the Republican Party.

[Purveyor]

30. Well things aren't all 'warm and fuzzy' within the dem party

and their 'establishment' either.

[TomCADem]

32. Seriously? They Are Stuck With Racist Trump or Crazy Cruz...

...if you cater to the crazy, racist fringe, you should not be surprised that the top two candidates are crazy and/or racist.

[Sunlei]

36. Republicans built The Kracken & stole their voters only Democracy, their one vote will not count.

King of the underworld
God of the Dead and Riches

[sofa king]

37. Voters don't vote for President, either.

They vote for electors who vote for President. There is always a cutout at every stage of the process because from the very beginning our nation's founders assumed that an aspiring tyrant would come along sooner or later.

They probably also assumed that the aspiring tyrant would be wearing a wig, and what do you know? He is.

[Myrina]

50. Sounds alot like Howard Dean ...

n/t

[TDale313]

51. Both parties have been making this abundantly clear.

This is the point of the Superdelegates on the Dem side- a safety valve in case this illusion that people actually having a say goes horribly horribly wrong (like us actually nominating someone who will challenge their status quo)

[ruralsteve]

52. The GOP chose all those Trump-lickins

The GOP has done everything it could to call bigots and extremists into their party since the first Nixon administration, and they have excelled in breeding more of them and coddling their demon spawn. And not only that, they've armed them. Will the GOP be able to avoid bloodshed in a contested convention? I am beginning to seriously doubt it.

The Republican party of Eisenhower, Dirksen, Nelson Rockefeller, and Gerry Ford is long dead, killed off by Nixon, Reagan, and the Tea Party. And by never, until the last couple of weeks, having objected to the extremists in their party, the current "Republicans" are reaping what they have sown.

[Attorney in Texas]

58. Didn't Howie Dean pretty much say the same think a couple of weeks ago?