|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 27 2016 10:25 Souma wrote: The impracticality you speak of doesn't exist. Stop making shit up.
I don't think you quite understand the implications of this Trump run. If you think the Republican party can be reformed then I wish you good luck on your noble sisyphean task.
In the mean time please don't remove the guardrails that keep fools away from the democratic nomination
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
If Trump wins the nomination you'd be pretty dumb not to see that the Republican party will change dramatically.
Political parties change all the time.
|
People dont
They vote for the same racist policies they did 50 years ago. and they will again in the next election. Under the Republican banner or not.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
They actually do, but even if they didn't you act like that actually means anything. There's a lot of people in this country, and the Republican party itself is very diverse. Don't be daft.
Edit: The situation of racism, while still very much alive, has evolved from 50 years ago. I don't think you understand the very real fact that societies very well do transform.
|
Not sure how this relates to the superdelegate system.
|
On March 27 2016 10:23 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2016 10:18 ticklishmusic wrote: I'd rather not get George McGovern'd again. "I just want my way! Who cares about democracy!"
Representative democracy is a thing for a reason
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On March 27 2016 10:39 PassiveAce wrote: Not sure how this relates to the superdelegate system. Me neither? You're the one going on about people not changing.
On March 27 2016 10:39 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2016 10:23 Souma wrote:On March 27 2016 10:18 ticklishmusic wrote: I'd rather not get George McGovern'd again. "I just want my way! Who cares about democracy!" Representative democracy is a thing for a reason Just because there's such a thing doesn't excuse the current political process. If you're going to justify the current system you're gonna have to do better than that.
|
On March 27 2016 10:25 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2016 10:23 Souma wrote:On March 27 2016 10:18 ticklishmusic wrote: I'd rather not get George McGovern'd again. "I just want my way! Who cares about democracy!" Clinton is likely gonna win without superdelegates. Bernie's newest strategy is to try and peel 'em off along with some weird shit about trying to get pledged delegates to swap to him somehow. I wouldn't throw stones from that glass house.
this like much of what you have been saying lately is just not an accurate representation of reality.
She is all but certain to not clinch without super delegates (that's not my pro Bernie spin, that's the raw reality of the numbers and the projections even with her winning NY by ~the current margin. That reality is why Bernie has since explained his position on a starting point for superdelegates that doesn't crap all over democracy.
But as Dean and others like him are unlikely to switch, we're more talking about a variety of justifications for why it's in the parties interest to nominate one or the other.
|
The super delegates should go for whatever candidate wins the popular vote. Period. If they win the majority of the vote give them the nod. I don't even give a fuck if someone like trump wins, super delegates or w/e should not change outcomes of the vote. If the people fuck up well then that is their fault but it was still THEIR pick.
I really don't like the the idea of elites having this kind of extra influence.
If Bernie manages to edge our the popular vote then the super delegates should flock to hin. If not they flock to Hillary.
|
On March 27 2016 10:49 Slaughter wrote: The super delegates should go for whatever candidate wins the popular vote. Period. If theyou win the majority of the vote give them the nod. I don't even give a fuck if someone like trump wins, super delegates or w/e should not change outcomes of the vote. If the people fuck up well then that is their fault but it was still THEIR pick.
I really don't like the the idea of elites having this kind of extra influence. I mean, the fact super delegates exist is mind blowing.
On the other hand, if Trump was in the same position as Bernie is in reference to another front runners, everyone would love the super delegate system.
|
Not really. They exist to keep people that are unelectable/unpalatable away.
Having people that know the business of governance have a free voice is a pretty nuanced solution to the problem of voters picking retarded candidates. Which is a problem that comes up with some frequency
|
On March 27 2016 10:40 Souma wrote: Just because there's such a thing doesn't excuse the current political process. If you're going to justify the current system you're gonna have to do better than that.
People already gave you the reason. For the same reason no democratic system is flat, it devolves into mob rule and produces nonsense or unelectable people
|
Is Bernie even close enough to Clinton for the superdelegate margin to matter?
Edit- he's not.
|
On March 27 2016 11:01 PassiveAce wrote: Is Bernie even close enough to Clinton for the superdelegate margin to matter?
Said it at least three times now. Yes, neither of them is likely to clinch with pledged delegates unless Bernie got big upsets NY and CA, or if Hillary had won WA by a decent margin.
|
Because screw what the people think us elites who are in control currently know whats good for the plebs more then they do?
Superdelegates are undemocratic, say what you will about trump if he gets nominated but he will have won through democratic ways. That people who call themselves democrats are against democracy is just the height of irony.
|
If trump wins through democracy then democracy is obv broken and I would like a refund please.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On March 27 2016 10:59 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2016 10:40 Souma wrote: Just because there's such a thing doesn't excuse the current political process. If you're going to justify the current system you're gonna have to do better than that. People already gave you the reason. For the same reason no democratic system is flat, it devolves into mob rule and produces nonsense or unelectable people Nope, sorry, not a good enough answer. Give me something that's doesn't in the end equate to, "control for people who think they know better but are still as dumb and fallible as everyone else and just want what's theirs."
On March 27 2016 11:05 PassiveAce wrote: If trump wins through democracy then democracy is obv broken and I would like a refund please. Don't think you realize this but our democracy is already broken and not very existent, and not for the reasons you think it is.
|
On March 27 2016 11:03 Sermokala wrote: Because screw what the people think us elites who are in control currently know whats good for the plebs more then they do?
Superdelegates are undemocratic, say what you will about trump if he gets nominated but he will have won through democratic ways. That people who call themselves democrats are against democracy is just the height of irony. Superdelegates are a way for a party to deny someone from hijacking their party.
It's not pretty, but it's extremely not pretty because of only a 2 party system.
The superdelegate system would be a lot more useful when there's a significant number of different parties.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
trump saying he likes macarthur has to be some kind of designer troll
|
Hawaii is looking like another ~75% - 25%
|
|
|
|