Typical dems... cloak and daggers...

Superfreak said:
No shit.... thanks captain obvious.... we have been over that numerous times on this thread.... YES, the dems are a private organization. Yes, they are doing nothing illegal.

However, how can you say with a straight face that it does not alter elections. The whole purpose of primary elections/caucuses is for the people of the respective parties to choose their candidates. If the DNC leaders want to simply pick their candidate, then fine. But don't go through the charade that it is the peoples choice and then act as if everything is just fine when they hide the results of the peoples choice. That is not democracy.

As for the HOW part of changing it. Yes, I understand that it has to be changed from within the Dem party. But given the responses from the dems on this board, I am guessing they are ok with being lemmings.
Click to expand...

Your argument is completely partisan because you don't seem to have any problems with republicans choosing their own candidate.

I ask AGAIN, do you think republicans would allow Ron Paul to be their candidate?

The purpose of primaries is for the PARTY to pick it's candidate, not voters.

That's the charade that you bought into.

The will of delegates don't have to be accepted at party conventions. Is that democratic?

Either argue this position against all parties that engage in choosing their own candidate or accept that you're just a partisan mad at democrats.

If you want to criticize all parties I'm with you .. I even included my own party, the Greens. But to simply pick out the dems is partisan.
 
Last edited:
blackascoal said:
Your argument is completely partisan because you don't seem to have any problems with republicans choosing their own candidate.

I ask AGAIN, do you think republicans would allow Ron Paul to be their candidate?

The purpose of primaries is for the PARTY to pick it's candidate, not voters.

That's the charade that you bought into.

The will of delegates don't have to be accepted at party conventions. Is that democratic?

Either argue this position against all parties that engage in choosing their own candidate or accept that you're just a partisan mad at democrats.

If you want to criticize all parties I'm with you .. I even included my own party, the Greens. But to simply pick out the dems is partisan.
Click to expand...

Why would the Republicans not allow Ron Paul to have the nomination if he had the most votes and brought in the most money (which go hand in hand)?
 
cawacko said:
Why would the Republicans not allow Ron Paul to have the nomination if he had the most votes and brought in the most money (which go hand in hand)?
Click to expand...

Because he does not represent the goals and ideals of the Republican Party and his supporters are not republicans.

SEE: Supreme Court ruling on open primaries.

Political parties are PRIVATE organizations.
 
blackascoal said:
Because he does not represent the goals and ideals of the Republican Party and his supporters are not republicans.

SEE: Supreme Court ruling on open primaries.

Political parties are PRIVATE organizations.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that if Ron Paul won Iowa, N.H., S.C. etc. the Republican Party still would not give him the nomination? I don't understand that.
 
cawacko said:
Do you believe that if Ron Paul won Iowa, N.H., S.C. etc. the Republican Party still would not give him the nomination? I don't understand that.
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ they'd put a hit out on him first! How naive can you be Cawacko? Yeah, they're going to allow the nomination of a bug-eyed little freak who has beliefs that would send moderates, not so moderates, and independents screaming for the hills, would cause the biggest electoral landslide since Reagan beat Mondale, and, would drag down nearly every congressional and senate race with him, causing a redistribution of political power that could last 20 years.

Or, they could find room for him at the cemetary.

What do you think?

See, at least I am smart enough to know what would happen if Kucinich started winning primaries. For different reasons, he ain't getting anywhere near the white house either. But there's plenty of room for him in the cemetary too.
 
they wouldn't have to kill him.

they'd bury him in a mountain of cash, and smears. Remember what they did to Scott Ritter to shut him up, when he was screaming to the world that there was no WMD in iraq?

and its absolutly correct that the GOP would never allow Ron Paul and his kooky ideas, to drag the party down to the worst electoral defeat in history.
 
cawacko said:
Do you believe that if Ron Paul won Iowa, N.H., S.C. etc. the Republican Party still would not give him the nomination? I don't understand that.
Click to expand...

First, the Republican Party is not going to allow Paul to win anything and I repeat, they've closed many primaries to ensure that. Closing their primaries are protected by the First Amendment and upheld by the Supreme Court.

They don't have to accept the votes of any delegation, don't even have to recognize any delegation.

Political parties are PRIVATE organizations, not subject to any dictate of democracy.
 
Darla said:
Jesus Christ they'd put a hit out on him first! How naive can you be Cawacko? Yeah, they're going to allow the nomination of a bug-eyed little freak who has beliefs that would send moderates, not so moderates, and independents screaming for the hills, would cause the biggest electoral landslide since Reagan beat Mondale, and, would drag down nearly every congressional and senate race with him, causing a redistribution of political power that could last 20 years.

Or, they could find room for him at the cemetary.

What do you think?

See, at least I am smart enough to know what would happen if Kucinich started winning primaries. For different reasons, he ain't getting anywhere near the white house either. But there's plenty of room for him in the cemetary too.
Click to expand...

Correct and correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top