News Media: The Fourth Estate, The Printing Press, The Display Screen ... > "Info. War" ? Centralized Control Of The Messages

Rigby5 said:
"The worst part of our system is the political party that can select a candidate for the whole party without having majority consent." R5 #20
Click to expand...
?
I suspect the distinction between party population, and national population is blurred here. Care to clarify?

Rigby5 said:
"The solutions generally involve allowing more candidates on the final ballot." R5 #20
Click to expand...
The superficial appeal of that idea wears thin quick. Reductio ad absurdum, if 3 is better than 2, and 7 is better than 4 then is 99 better than 56? Why not a million? Ideal ! Right?
Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Jesse Ventura was about the darkest horse I can recall in a political election. BUT !!
Because he ran 3rd party there were 3 candidates on the ballot. And as you know from having divided 100 by 3 in such electoral contest a candidate can win the vote / election
without obtaining majority support from the electorate.

Compounding this, though Governor Ventura seems to have served faithfully, honorably, his third party status disenfranchised him from his own legislature.
The result, Minnesota Governor Ventura's administration was little more than a place-holder, a pause on State governance until the duopoly kicked in again.

I welcome a diversity of candidates, and platforms.
This the benefit, the power of our primaries, to cull from an ocean of competing agenda the two most favored by the bipartisan electorate. If you'll pardon an inaccurate oversimplification:
40% die-hard Republicans vote reliably Republican.
40% die-hard Democrats vote reliably Democrat.
Therefore the outcome of our elections are decided by the remaining 20%, the so called "swing vote".
 
sear said:
?
I suspect the distinction between party population, and national population is blurred here. Care to clarify?


The superficial appeal of that idea wears thin quick. Reductio ad absurdum, if 3 is better than 2, and 7 is better than 4 then is 99 better than 56? Why not a million? Ideal ! Right?
Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Jesse Ventura was about the darkest horse I can recall in a political election. BUT !!
Because he ran 3rd party there were 3 candidates on the ballot. And as you know from having divided 100 by 3 in such electoral contest a candidate can win the vote / election
without obtaining majority support from the electorate.

Compounding this, though Governor Ventura seems to have served faithfully, honorably, his third party status disenfranchised him from his own legislature.
The result, Minnesota Governor Ventura's administration was little more than a place-holder, a pause on State governance until the duopoly kicked in again.

I welcome a diversity of candidates, and platforms.
This the benefit, the power of our primaries, to cull from an ocean of competing agenda the two most favored by the bipartisan electorate. If you'll pardon an inaccurate oversimplification:
40% die-hard Republicans vote reliably Republican.
40% die-hard Democrats vote reliably Democrat.
Therefore the outcome of our elections are decided by the remaining 20%, the so called "swing vote".
Click to expand...

Political parties are not bound by laws or rules, and can select candidates that did not win the primary vote.
Like in 2016, Bernie Sanders won the most votes, but the party told hundreds of special delegates to ensure Hillary would be selected as the party candidate.

Political parties actually add nothing to the election, are not sponsored by any law, and should just be totally eliminated.
The duopoly is a bad idea and parties should not exist at all.
 
sear said:
This the benefit, the power of our primaries, to cull from an ocean of competing agenda the two most favored by the bipartisan electorate.
Click to expand...

Definitely not the case - the party is not required to consider what the "bipartisan electorate" wants.

As Rigby points out

Like in 2016, Bernie Sanders won the most votes, but the party told hundreds of special delegates to ensure Hillary would be selected as the party candidate.
Click to expand...
In short, the DNC was so determined to make Hillary the next President that they gamed the system to ensure that she ended up as the Democratic candidate.

A different discussion but she was a terrible candidate with an unpleasant public persona. One who came to the election with far too much baggage from her husband's time in office. And she ran a terrible campaign. It didn't help that the media kept predicting she'd easily win the election so a lot of people who probably would have voted for her figured that there was no need to vote so they didn't bother coming out. The end result was Trump 45.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top