Delegates....a rigged system?

[Iceweasel]

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO fucks about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

The "will of the people" gave us the moonbat messiah. I shouldn't have to wash the taste of dick out of my mouth just because we live in a nation of drones that keep jumping on popculture bandwagons and cults of personaility.

And we can blame them for it but I also place blame on the media that put obama in the best light possible and his opponents the worse. I still blame Americans though because they should know the media is rigged too.

 

[jillian]

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO fucks about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

your last paragraph is the problem with republicans now. it's false....and it's been said for the past 36 years or so because ronald reagan wanted to be "states' rights" and get the votes of george wallace voters. try building infrastructure without government.

government does scientific research better.

government does not for profit education better

government does social security just fine

etc.

what you truly get when you undermine government.... is donald trump.

government does scientific research better. - Government has developed so little of the technology driving us, this is ridiculous

government does not for profit education better - Yeah, the most expensive schools in the west with the worst results. I want more of that, baby! Not

government does social security just fine - A trust fund with no money that's growing ever more crippling on our children. Yeah, that's swell.

Three of the biggest wastes of our economic assets, that's what you named

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

 

[kaz]

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

your last paragraph is the problem with republicans now. it's false....and it's been said for the past 36 years or so because ronald reagan wanted to be "states' rights" and get the votes of george wallace voters. try building infrastructure without government.

government does scientific research better.

government does not for profit education better

government does social security just fine

etc.

what you truly get when you undermine government.... is donald trump.

government does scientific research better. - Government has developed so little of the technology driving us, this is ridiculous

government does not for profit education better - Yeah, the most expensive schools in the west with the worst results. I want more of that, baby! Not

government does social security just fine - A trust fund with no money that's growing ever more crippling on our children. Yeah, that's swell.

Three of the biggest wastes of our economic assets, that's what you named

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

 

[jillian]

All this time on political message boards and you don't know what a libertarian even is? What a dumb shit
What is a small government libertarian?

Liberals do not "know" anything. They haven't the cognitive capacity to know things. They believe in things, most of it fantasy.

I'm not totally on board with libertarians, I'm certainly more into maintaining our military dominance of the world but regardless of all the other issues the most important thing is getting the economy back on track.

Nothing else matters if we go bankrupt. The only one who will reduce government and slash the budget is Cruz. Everyone else, including Dump, is talking about "universal health care" and any rational person knows that alone will destroy us.

Poor wingnut you're so ignorant and deluded.

 

[jillian]

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

your last paragraph is the problem with republicans now. it's false....and it's been said for the past 36 years or so because ronald reagan wanted to be "states' rights" and get the votes of george wallace voters. try building infrastructure without government.

government does scientific research better.

government does not for profit education better

government does social security just fine

etc.

what you truly get when you undermine government.... is donald trump.

government does scientific research better. - Government has developed so little of the technology driving us, this is ridiculous

government does not for profit education better - Yeah, the most expensive schools in the west with the worst results. I want more of that, baby! Not

government does social security just fine - A trust fund with no money that's growing ever more crippling on our children. Yeah, that's swell.

Three of the biggest wastes of our economic assets, that's what you named

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

Poor baby. Can't even work out your own material so have to plagiarize. No worries. You keep lying. We'll keep laughing at you

 

[kaz]

All this time on political message boards and you don't know what a libertarian even is? What a dumb shit
What is a small government libertarian?

Liberals do not "know" anything. They haven't the cognitive capacity to know things. They believe in things, most of it fantasy.

I'm not totally on board with libertarians, I'm certainly more into maintaining our military dominance of the world but regardless of all the other issues the most important thing is getting the economy back on track.

Nothing else matters if we go bankrupt. The only one who will reduce government and slash the budget is Cruz. Everyone else, including Dump, is talking about "universal health care" and any rational person knows that alone will destroy us.

Poor wingnut you're so ignorant and deluded.

What he said was dead on. What did you disagree with? Or you're just here to spam?

 

[boedicca]

Here's just a small taste of the delegate system in action. Rigged cluster fuck or perfectly normal?

Delegate Deception - Linkis.com

The whole freakin' system is rigged, bub.

Cronyism has mostly killed off liberty.

 

[kaz]

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

your last paragraph is the problem with republicans now. it's false....and it's been said for the past 36 years or so because ronald reagan wanted to be "states' rights" and get the votes of george wallace voters. try building infrastructure without government.

government does scientific research better.

government does not for profit education better

government does social security just fine

etc.

what you truly get when you undermine government.... is donald trump.

government does scientific research better. - Government has developed so little of the technology driving us, this is ridiculous

government does not for profit education better - Yeah, the most expensive schools in the west with the worst results. I want more of that, baby! Not

government does social security just fine - A trust fund with no money that's growing ever more crippling on our children. Yeah, that's swell.

Three of the biggest wastes of our economic assets, that's what you named

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

Nothing you said is accurate. But I understand it fits your talking points

Poor baby. Can't even work out your own material so have to plagiarize. No worries. You keep lying. We'll keep laughing at you

You really don't get it, do you? I'd say damn all those concussions from your head banking the head board while you earned a living, but I doubt you were very smart before that either

 

[kaz]

Here's just a small taste of the delegate system in action. Rigged cluster fuck or perfectly normal?

Delegate Deception - Linkis.com

The whole freakin' system is rigged, bub.

Cronyism has mostly killed off liberty.

I think the problem really rests with the gullibility of the voters. The system would change if people cared about it rather than their team winning.

The Iraqis for example as much as they hated and distrusted Hussein still basically believed everything the Iraqi media told them. I don't see any real difference between that and Americans

 

[Pete7469]

You really don't get it, do you? I'd say damn all those concussions from your head banking the head board while you earned a living, but I doubt you were very smart before that either

 

[Pete7469]

The whole freakin' system is rigged, bub.

Cronyism has mostly killed off liberty.

The same cronyism Dump took advantage of so that he could throw old ladies out of their homes to build casinos that went bankrupt.

The only thing more bankrupt than Dump's casinos is his character.

 

[oreo]

Here's just a small taste of the delegate system in action. Rigged cluster fuck or perfectly normal?

Delegate Deception - Linkis.com

Any Presidential caucus state can be manipulated. They typically have very low voter turnout--as not many are going to bother to get out on a Tuesday night to sit around a 3 hour meeting to cast a vote. They are typically won by underdog candidates, who's supporters are willing to put up with the pain for the meeting. They in no way represent the overwhelming sentiment of that state (for either party). Why their use hasn't been challenged in a Presidential primary is beyond belief. They disenfranchise, overseas military, the Elderly, young parents with children who can't get a babysitter, the sick, and people who work during the caucus time period.

I live in Colorado--and who screwed Trump out of his rightfully earned DELEGATES were the Tea Party aka the right wing of the Republican party. The grass roots of the party did it. These are the people who have continually fought against a Presidential primary in this state. They threatened 4 state senators that initially were in favor of a primary last year, and these senators backed out because of pressure from the right wing of the party. Unfortunately for Donald Trump supporters, they were also Ted Cruz delegates.
Revealed: Colorado Lawmakers Who Voted to Scrap Election Are Ted Cruz Delegates - Breitbart

 

[HUGGY]

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a bitch that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO fucks about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That was a nice simple analogy of what can happen when the original intent of a party is skewed off the rails when a large number of people with their own agenda are invited in. That is exactly what happened to the GOP. Reagan and Bush worked hard to get the well organized Christian Coalition working for the republican party. They had access to a fantastic grass roots, from the ground up organization. The Christians started entering candidates in every local election they could and as they saw the results in nearly every community they inserted their people in most local elections they saw the path to changing national election outcomes using the GOP brand.

Where things really went sideways for the GOP was when Newt Gingrich went hard to get the position of Speaker of The House so he could have a say in nearly all important business of the country. He was the father of the hate rhetoric towards the dems. His leadership installed the methods of using the constant name calling and making sure that republicans ALWAYS referred to their opposition as evil. He personally demonized the dems from his position of leadership and power and that way of constant disrespect has stuck with the GOP to this day.

 

[kaz]

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a bitch that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO fucks about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That was a nice simple analogy of what can happen when the original intent of a party is skewed off the rails when a large number of people with their own agenda are invited in. That is exactly what happened to the GOP. Reagan and Bush worked hard to get the well organized Christian Coalition working for the republican party. They had access to a fantastic grass roots, from the ground up organization. The Christians started entering candidates in every local election they could and as they saw the results in nearly every community they inserted their people in most local elections they saw the path to changing national election outcomes using the GOP brand.

Where things really went sideways for the GOP was when Newt Gingrich went hard to get the position of Speaker of The House so he could have a say in nearly all important business of the country. He was the father of the hate rhetoric towards the dems. His leadership installed the methods of using the constant name calling and making sure that republicans ALWAYS referred to their opposition as evil. He personally demonized the dems from his position of leadership and power and that way of constant disrespect has stuck with the GOP to this day.

I feel you. And thankfully we have ubiquitous government power to fix that!

 

[thanatos144]

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a bitch that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO fucks about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

This is a primary. Not a general. Why does that confuse you so much?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Should American's (registered voters) be denied their vote be it via caucus or straight vote primary? Yes or no?

As long as Parties are able to make up rules each year it's not democratic. Congress should set the rules for both Parties, and should fund the election.

No. No, they shouldn't. We have no need for the government to usurp even more control of the lives and choices of individuals.

How would that translate to government usurping control?

Did you just ask me how Congress dictating rules for private organizations is the government usurping control? Seriously?

You are continuously running with the political parties are like private businesses like grocery chains meme. That isn't what we are discussing. The political parties are deeply involved in government, you are either propagandizing or stuck on stupid.

They're no more "deeply involved" with the government than any group of citizens attempting to influence the policies of the government that affect their lives. They're private organizations. Being organized to affect public policy rather than organized to generate income changes that not in the slightest. There is no amount of "Ehrmagerd, they want to get a candidate elected, that means they're GOVERNMENT!" that will make that true.

They aren't doing anything that you aren't doing, really, except they're working harder at it, spending more money on it, and being more effective at it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And the tax cuts weren't the problem, SPENDING was the problem.

You're saying that tax cuts didn't add massive amounts to the debt?

Tax cuts when they are as high as they are now reduce the deficit, particularly as a percent of GDP since reductions lead to higher GDP and vice versa.

You just can't help yourself from changing the argument when you are losing, can you?

We're talking about the DEBT not the DEFICIT.

Go take that nap!

No, they didn't. Particularly as I said in a real sense as opposed to a nominal one. Tax cuts trigger economic activity that offsets the decreased tax revenue. But only if you believe economists instead of lawyers.

Despite Reagan's tax cuts, tax revenue doubled under his administration

*cough* Decreased tax percentage. The revenue itself actually increases. It's the difference between taking 25% of $100, or 10% of $1000.

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a bitch that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO fucks about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

That's nice. But, um, they only have VOTES in an actual Election. In primaries, they just have preferences.

The people have no business thinking they have rights that they don't. Political parties need to care what the voters think in a practical sense, because it's very hard to persuade them to give support if they don't, but they have no legal obligation to them whatsoever.

If you don't like what they do, don't support them. Simple as that.

 

[HUGGY]

Successful delegates would define the system as carefully "designed" to achieve results out of a chaotic process that really only demands that you know the rules and simply show up with some ability to promote a certain candidate. The popularity or the previous success of a candidate is secondary to a well prepared delegate that can convince others of the benefits of getting behind the candidate the delegates are promoting at the caucuses.

Trump has just as much opportunity to "plant" his supporters at the caucuses as any candidate does. It is just a sensible way to showcase candidates as must build a coalition of like minded delegates.

At some point the parties have to start narrowing down the number of candidates. There has to be a way to offer the candidates more power heading into the convention. That is the purpose of the debates. That is the way the states pick their delegates.

At the end in the general election every voter has his say. The voter can choose to vote for the candidate offered by the party or write in whomever the voter desires. It isn't cheating to have a well oiled machine that convinces the state delegates their candidate is the best representative heading into the general election.

It looks to me that Trump is long on bravado when on stage and light on organization at some of the caucuses.

 

[Toro]

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

A political party is a private organization, not a branch of the government. Political parties can choose their delegates and Presidential candidates any way they wish.

One could argue that the will of the people isn't being represented when one candidate has 37% of the votes and 46% of the delegates. Perhaps to be truly representative, the candidate who receives 37% of the vote should receive 37% of the delegates.

And Trump's numbers would have been lower had states allowed only Republicans to pick the Republican candidate rather than allow non-Republicans to participate in open primaries.

That's what's so ironic. The candidate who is doing all the bitching and complaining about how rigged the system is has benefited the most from receiving disproportionately more delegates than votes.

Instead of whining incessantly like the sore loser he is, perhaps Trump should have understood all the rules and "hired the best people" to run his campaigns in the states. It doesn't bode well for how he would run the country if he can't organize a Presidential campaign.

 

[Iceweasel]

As long as Parties are able to make up rules each year it's not democratic. Congress should set the rules for both Parties, and should fund the election.

No. No, they shouldn't. We have no need for the government to usurp even more control of the lives and choices of individuals.

How would that translate to government usurping control?

Did you just ask me how Congress dictating rules for private organizations is the government usurping control? Seriously?

You are continuously running with the political parties are like private businesses like grocery chains meme. That isn't what we are discussing. The political parties are deeply involved in government, you are either propagandizing or stuck on stupid.

They're no more "deeply involved" with the government than any group of citizens attempting to influence the policies of the government that affect their lives. They're private organizations. Being organized to affect public policy rather than organized to generate income changes that not in the slightest. There is no amount of "Ehrmagerd, they want to get a candidate elected, that means they're GOVERNMENT!" that will make that true.

They aren't doing anything that you aren't doing, really, except they're working harder at it, spending more money on it, and being more effective at it.

I'm on par with the Republican and Democratic national parties? You are living in denial, that must be your problem.

The entire election process on local, state and federal government is run through them. How does that not speak to you?