I do not accept the results of any of the caucuses

[dlwickham]

because they are inherently undemocratic because not everyone who wants to participate can

[FSogol]

1. I do not accept that I am almost out of tasty Pale Ales.

[dlwickham]

2. I do not accept the fact that it's going to storm soon

Your turn

[Agschmid]

9. I can buy more, we are going to need it!

[FSogol]

13. Yup, that's true. n/t

[rbrnmw]

32. Here's a six pack

[FSogol]

35. Many thanks.

[moriah]

59. I don't accept that I am out of Angry Orchards, either.

Of course, I'm sure you're responding in this fashion because you recognize the OP is a copycat of those who are refusing to accept the results of primaries that went Hillary's way (Bernie did quite well overall in caucus states).

I agree that if the caucus system can't keep up with the number of people who want to participate in it, those states parties should consider moving to primaries in the future. Several caucus states this year did have turnout that overwhelmed the process.

But I do, personally, support closed primaries because of the potential for ratfucking if one primary is already decided but another's isn't by the time of the election. I also feel that voters who consider themselves unaffiliated, Independents, or of another party aren't the people who should be deciding the nominations for either Republicans or Democrats. I support ranked-choice voting and vigorous third parties. Until we get ranked-choice voting, though, we are locked into a two-party system, a "lesser of two evils", and the need to vote strategically in General Elections.

Those who want a real revolution should focus on getting ranked choice voting. But like my tagline says, I'm not going to wait for it. I will try to change the system, but until it is changed, I work within it to get what progress we can make. And for me, that means voting Democratic in the General. I voted my conscience in the primary. In 2008, most didn't agree with me, but I worked my tail off for Obama even so -- stopping my phonebanking when the writing was on the wall in my opinion, taking a break, then getting on board once I had dealt with my disappointment (well before Hillary had conceded).

This year, I hope that people will do the same -- or at least come aboard when we get to crunch time.

[FSogol]

60. In response:

Of course, I'm sure you're responding in this fashion because you recognize the OP is a copycat of those who are refusing to accept the results of primaries that went Hillary's way (Bernie did quite well overall in caucus states).[/div ]

True

I agree that if the caucus system can't keep up with the number of people who want to participate in it, those states parties should consider moving to primaries in the future. Several caucus states this year did have turnout that overwhelmed the process. [/div ]

True. In VA, the party has switched back on forth between Primary and Caucus. The front runner almost always wins the caucus, but the primary have a low turnout. No clear winner on which is better. Since I had a terrible time trying to caucus for Gary hart, I do prefer the primary.

But I do, personally, support closed primaries because of the potential for ratfucking if one primary is already decided but another's isn't by the time of the election. I also feel that voters who consider themselves unaffiliated, Independents, or of another party aren't the people who should be deciding the nominations for either Republicans or Democrats. I support ranked-choice voting and vigorous third parties. Until we get ranked-choice voting, though, we are locked into a two-party system, a "lesser of two evils", and the need to vote strategically in General Elections.[/div ]

Completely agree. I have no problem with closed primaries. Wanna be a Democrat? Join the party. Wanna help choose our candidate, join the party. There is a lot of work to run everything in a party. You can't just show up on election day and state, "everyone do what I want." I'd encourage the Sanders crowd to join up and get to work. Change has to begin on the local level and work up. It doesn't happen overnight.

Those who want a real revolution should focus on getting ranked choice voting. But like my tagline says, I'm not going to wait for it. I will try to change the system, but until it is changed, I work within it to get what progress we can make. And for me, that means voting Democratic in the General. I voted my conscience in the primary. In 2008, most didn't agree with me, but I worked my tail off for Obama even so -- stopping my phonebanking when the writing was on the wall in my opinion, taking a break, then getting on board once I had dealt with my disappointment (well before Hillary had conceded).

This year, I hope that people will do the same -- or at least come aboard when we get to crunch time.

For me, it is unthinkable to not vote for the democratic nominee. Really, has anyone looked at the Bible-thumping, grifters, cons, and freaks running the GOP? I think Garrison Keillor described them best:

The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, people who believe Neil Armstrong's moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little honkers out to diminish the rest of us, Newt's evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk.

PS. Good job on grabbing some substance out of a funny, but throwaway thread. And while I cannot advocate drinking angry orchard, have one on me.

[JaneyVee]

3. Caucuses are straight up voter suppression.

End the caucuses.

[Fresh_Start]

4. many caucuses are also closed

so very low participation rate and independents can't participate
not to mention the length of the caucus prevents many people with busy lives from participating

Seriously if an hour wait for a poll to open or an hour wait in line for voting can prevent someone from voting...then definitely 2 hour caucuses can prevent someone from participating.

[tritsofme]

5. I agree caucuses are undemocratic and unrepresentative, they should be completely banned

from the nomination process. All contests should be primary elections that protect the secret ballot.

Rules are rules for this time, but they should never again choose delegates in our nomination process.

[AgingAmerican]

6. lol

Pisspoor projection

[AgingAmerican]

12. My mother died in 1998

But thanks for your 'concern'

[dlwickham]

14. you're welcome

[Agschmid]

11. It isn't projection... It's something else.

[Corporate666]

7. I don't accept that we keep getting snow in New England

We need Bernie in office to implement a ban on all snow after February.











<to be paid for by an 73% tax increase on low income families>

[dlwickham]

8. will he use unicorns or that damn bird to impliment the ban

[bvar22]

15. You don't accept the results of any Caucuses because

"not everyone who wants to participate can"

You mean like the New York Primary?

[rhett o rick]

16. So who can't participate?

[Dem2]

17. Handicapped, the aged, those who can't get off work for hours, college kids who might have classes

The list goes on and on if you'd like me to expand on why caucuses are shit and disenfranchise many more voters than a straight-up primary where participation is much easier.

[rhett o rick]

21. That's all a bunch of crap. One can vote absentee. At least in Washington the State.

I think you don't like caucuses because they are harder for the Authoritarian God to manipulate. And it's all about supporting the Authoritarian God.

[Dem2]

22. I think it's much much easier to manipulate a caucus

There's bullying that goes on, individuals in charge of keeping totals of votes - it's ripe for corruption.

Some states have absentee, other's don't - after the caucuses most here on both sides seem to agree that they are arcane and undemocratic. You appear to be on an island with very few who see this unfair archaic system as reasonable.

[rhett o rick]

37. I have participated for many years and what you say is untrue. I ran a caucus. I oversaw the

election of our delegates. I have records. The "individuals in charge of keeping totals" are keeping a list of humans. And it's those humans that cast their votes. So if your "list" shows Sanders with 500 delegates and Clinton with 300 delegates, those numbers are people and are all going to show up and vote. How are you going to manipulate that?

"You appear to be on an island with very few who see this unfair archaic system as reasonable." Well I am not as trusting (read gullible) as some that are happy to put their ballot or vote into a machine and accept that no one has messed with it. Even though we've seen many, many cases of machines changing votes. That doesn't happen with caucuses. Also, I live in a county that has a high population of republicons, yet the Democrats are very successful at electing people. Part of the success is that we have caucuses and encourage people to meet their neighbors and discuss issues and we have a very good database of our people.

I know that it's so much easier to mail in a ballot and never leave the farm

[dsc]

23. Washington state is borderline unique in permitting that

the only other one that does is Wyoming. All of the other ones have no absentee voting at all. You in the military in Iraq, no vote for you. Nursing home, no vote for you. Out of town because your parent died, no vote for you.

[rhett o rick]

39. I am going to have to guess your point. So those states that use the caucus system,

excepting Wash and Wyoming, that don't have an absentee ballot system, would have an absentee ballot system if they changed to a primary system. Why is that logical?

[dsc]

46. amazingly enough we don't have to rely on speculation

Nearly all of these states use primaries to choose nominees in every other instance and we can look at these rules. Here is a link that summaries them.

http://www.longdistancevoter.org/absentee_voting_rules#.Vxvb4TArLIW

BTW even if they didn't permit such ballots the hours of voting are much more convenient. In Iowa you had to be at the caucus site at a particular time for several hours. In primaries you can vote for a few minutes (in most cases) and you have hours to choose from.

[rhett o rick]

47. We like that people get out to participate in the process. We discuss party platforms

and make connections.

[dsc]

48. you can do that without disenfranchising people who can't afford to spend that time

[rhett o rick]

51. No one is disenfranchised in Wash the State. What better time to get together than

at a caucus? There were 300 people at the high school where we held about 28 precinct caucuses. We discussed our county and state platforms. We talked about local elections and candidates.

[dsc]

56. I am glad they offer absentee ballots

and thus do not disenfranchise but many caucuses do. If a state wants to have a caucus and permit absentee voting then I have no problem with that.

[PotatoChip]

49. Maine caucuses have absentee voting too.

No reason is needed. You want an absentee ballot, just file a request form, and they will send you one-- no questions asked.

Super simple.

[dsc]

57. I am glad they do that

[Codeine]

38. Most caucuses have no mechanism for absentee voting. nt

[rhett o rick]

40. And you think those states that don't care to count absentees for caucuses

would care to count absentee ballots for primaries? Why would the state care in one case and not care in the other?

[Codeine]

43. Of course they would.

Anyone putting together a new primary system to replace the antique caucus nonsense would follow the lead of most every other primary system and institute absentee balloting. The only reason they don't now is because caucus advocates think there's some inherent value over people gathering and sharing their thoughts about things -- they haven't discovered we do that via the intarwebz now.

Or hell, if they want to stay cheap and save money then they can do the whole damned primary thing by mail. That seems to work. Then ALL ballots are absentee. Everyone eligible gets to play regardless of mobility and schedule.

Most people do not want to go argue politics in a school gym or a conference center with a bunch of yahoos they don't know. They just want to vote. Caucuses are stupid, noisy, archaic affairs and have no place in a modern system.

[rhett o rick]

45. It would be much easier to introduce absentee to their current system but they won't

even go that far.

[Codeine]

18. I do not accept that this blind dude is a master swordsman.

Nah, I totally do.

[griffi94]

30. I don't accept that you accept that.

[rhett o rick]

31. And I bet you can rationalize away the deaths of American troops (none from the almighty Ruling

Class) in the pursuit of spreading "democracy" across the globe as Clinton has pledged. Richard Perle and the neocons are drooling at the prospect of war with Iran. Clinton has already made it clear she would level them, I assume with nucs.

[Codeine]

34. A wildly inappropriate response to a Zatoichi joke. nt

[rhett o rick]

36. Very funny. I work with the homeless and think the hubris of those that support the

Rich and Richer while we have 2.5 million children homeless is sickening. Support Goldman-Sachs and shoot for 5 million children homeless. There are two sides to this class war. Plez reconsider the side you choose.

[Bjorn Against]

19. I think the entire primary process is undemocratic

Caucuses are undemocratic, closed primaries are undemocratic, voter purges such as what happened in Brooklyn are undemocratic, the campaign finance system is undemocratic, there are numerous ways in which the entire system is undemocratic.

The party leadership is corrupt and has been pushing a corrupt system for years, it is time to get rid of the old leadership and bring in a new leadership that will support democratic principles.

[cui bono]

20. I don't accept our entire election process for that same reason.

I don't accept closed primaries either beause they are only open to two parties who don't have enough members to justify that. It leaves out millions of independents who can't determine who will move ahead to run for president in this failed two party system or ours.

I don't accept the votes of super delegates because they are paid lobbyists and an arbitrary thing factored in to suppress a grass roots - you know, what the people want - movement. It's just a way for the establishment to control the process, thwarting democracy

I don't accept the arbitrary rules that both parties have for the primaries. They are undemocratic and used to game and manipulate the system in the establishment's favor, thwarting democracy.

I don't accept the results of any electronically run election.

I don't accept the results of any states where voters were purged. That's voter suppression.

I don't accept the results of any states where polling places were too few and far between leaving people unable to participate. That's voter suppression.

Our entire election process is flawed and broken. Not just caucuses. Don't you agree?

.

[Bluenorthwest]

24. Washington has a caucus, the Democratic Party sued the State to be allowed to have one...

Harry Reid is one of the people who pushed for Nevada to go caucus which it did in 2008, Hillary has won both contested Nevada caucuses thus far.
It's not like they dropped from the sky or were imposed by Republicans. Like NY's crappy laws they are made by current folks for good or bad.
I would fully object to a caucus system in my State, but other States are going to do as they wish, for good or for bad.

[sadoldgirl]

25. In that case, let's look at what happened in IA.

I think Bernie may die before the head of that
state's party will release the raw votes, which
he requested.

[Mike Nelson]

26. Agreed...

...hope the end this style of voting.

[wildeyed]

27. ....

[musicblind]

28. While I'm not a big fan of caucuses, we all knew the rules going in.

I think we should have a serious dialogue between both camps in order to bring about true primary reform in 2020. We should remove caucuses, I agree with that. We should also standardize state primaries and clearly defined registration deadlines that are closer to the actual election.

I voted for Bernie and I hate that people who may have legitimately wanted to vote for Bernie in the NY primary didn't get to. I'm not blaming Hillary for that. Those were the rules and the rules were available to everyone. It is our responsibility to inform ourselves. BUT, I think, now that we are informed, we should work to change rules like that in the future

[northernsouthern]

29. So you don't accept ANY of the states?

They are all caucus. Even our general election is. (that is what the whole delegate thing is about) Also my states was far easier to vote in than most of the ones I went to. You mail in your vote, or sign in when you get there, anyone can vote. You only stay if you want to run or elect a delegate. We don't purge voters, close stations, have ID laws, have registration deadlines...etc. Also it seems many of the ones that started with a primary had issues with ballots, provisional ballots, machines (Chicago)...Bill Clinton can't block our caucuses. All go at once, so no massive line (I will say"IF" you vote in person at the caucus compared to "IF" your primary voting location has no line at all, it is faster at a primary).

[beedle]

33. Totally agree

anyone that wants to participate, is a citizen of America and living in the state in question should be able to decide up to the last day which primary they want to participate in (hell, I would support everyone participating in both Republican and Democratic primaries, and any other primary that might come into being.)

And anyone who complains that this would lead to poll stuffing for the weakest candidates, then continue fixing the system. America needs a modern voting system. Voting needs to be standardized, centralized, modernized, simplified, and closely, fairly, and strictly audited.

[Surya Gayatri]

41. K & R. Thanks for posting.

[99Forever]

42. Bwahahahaha...

6 replies to get tossed out of your own OP.

Fucking way ta go sport!

[MoonRiver]

44. I WANT A PONY!

Edit: I don't like caucuses either.

[Codeine]

50. I DON'T ACCEPT YOUR PONY!!!

Wait, I just saw your pony and it's FUCKING AMAZING!!

[MoonRiver]

53. I know!!!!!!

Give it back to me - NOW!

[Codeine]

55. That little girl stole it.

She was mean.

[MoonRiver]

58. OMG, I'm going to have to put out a pony abduction alert on that kid!

[Bohemianwriter]

52. A small, yet humble suggestion..

Open primaries
Same day registration or automatic registration the year they turn 18
Paper ballots wit a paper trail
Receipt for the vote cast
Independent non-partisan oversight
EVERY VOTE must be counted before a winner is declared
Equal and objective media coverage of each candidate. What we see today is literally a bad joke.

And repeal Citizens United.

Any other suggestions?

[Skwmom]

54. Caucuses are A LOT harder to steal. Though not impossible as Iowa and NV have shown.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

61. I do not vote based on the results of primaries or caucuses.

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost. John Quincy Adams