Delegates....a rigged system?

[kaz]

Just because you monitor doesn't help you chase down thousands of people across a thousand miles.

U.S. Army vehicles vs. illegals traveling on foot or piled into a truck.

Ooh, that's a tough one! So evenly matched!

Someone gets a big gun and blasts a hole in one spot and government converges there or they chase thousands of people individually across a thousand miles. And you don't get the difference, it's the same to you. LOL. You're not a smart boy. Here's a ball, look it's bouncy ...

 

[mudwhistle]

True, and sadly he'd still be an improvement over the last eight years.

I'll never understand the delusional conservative mind. By almost every measure Obama has improved American life from the day he took office.

It's not that hard to fathom the christian fundamentalists that have taken over the GOP. Every thing about them is based on a lie no mater how hard they continue to sell it. They claim ownership of American morality as if they invented it and own the patent. Growing up believing in total nonsense has prepared the neo cons for going with "the group" on all issues and beliefs, including that Obama is the worst American president in history. They have always rejected facts. When faced with facts they come back with their "faith" as the supposed equal theory to everything. They do not need nor accept any information that crosses what they take on faith. Practically ALL of their "information" is religion based or religists generated. They are the lowest and poorest informed group of people in American history. It has been a sad several decades for what was once a proud and strong political party. People like Dwight Eisenhower and Barry Goldwater were well informed and based in reality.

Only a fool can deny the progress towards solvency of our economy. The only fly in the ointment that stands out remains the bubble that Wall street is continuing to build. Obama has done little to nothing in reigning in this dangerous development. In all fairness the republicans in the position of power would do nothing to help him addressing Wall street's and the bank's influence in congress.

What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?

Civil Rights?

 

[mudwhistle]

- social - Democrat - I'm way to the left of you, but you asked which party is closer.

In what way are you to the left of me?

Well, "you" in that statement was Democrats. But here are a few I'm with or to the left of the left:

- I'm pro-choice
- All drugs should be legal
- Prostitution should be legal
- Euthanasia should be legal
- Gambling should be legal
- There should be no morality laws where there is no victim (gay sex, oral sex, ...)
- Government should treat all it's citizens the same (no government marriage, no reverse discrimination, no quotas ...)

Why you commie bastard......

 

[Synthaholic]

According to you, voters don't get to decide the nominees from the two Parties? They only have a right to choose between two people that private organizations have chosen?

No Arnold, I think that the internal workings of the parties aren't a government agency. How stupid are you?

So, you believe that private organizations should not be interfered with as they decide who our 2 choices for POTUS will be?

Dunno about Kaz, but are you saying private organizations SHOULD be interfered with as they decide who THEY are going to support for President?

I'm saying they shouldn't be allowed to operate as private organizations.

And that ... is why I keep pointing out that you're not liberals, you are authoritarian leftists.

How do you get past the Constitution on that? The general leftist authoritarian plan, ignore it? The commerce clause covers controlling political parties, right?

The Constitution says nothing about political parties.

 

[Synthaholic]

It's not that hard to fathom the christian fundamentalists that have taken over the GOP. Every thing about them is based on a lie no mater how hard they continue to sell it. They claim ownership of American morality as if they invented it and own the patent. Growing up believing in total nonsense has prepared the neo cons for going with "the group" on all issues and beliefs, including that Obama is the worst American president in history. They have always rejected facts. When faced with facts they come back with their "faith" as the supposed equal theory to everything. They do not need nor accept any information that crosses what they take on faith. Practically ALL of their "information" is religion based or religists generated. They are the lowest and poorest informed group of people in American history. It has been a sad several decades for what was once a proud and strong political party. People like Dwight Eisenhower and Barry Goldwater were well informed and based in reality.

Only a fool can deny the progress towards solvency of our economy. The only fly in the ointment that stands out remains the bubble that Wall street is continuing to build. Obama has done little to nothing in reigning in this dangerous development. In all fairness the republicans in the position of power would do nothing to help him addressing Wall street's and the bank's influence in congress.

What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?

"What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?"

I'm sorry. I keep saying you are constantly mis reading my posts so I had to read this one again because I don't want to accuse you of being stupid without evidence. I didn't find a single word or group of words within the reply that states "social issues the republicans have passed". You are close though as they have ATTEMPTED to pass numerous pieces of legislation with versions of their moral agenda embedded within. That is one of their favorite tricks. They pretend to be addressing a valid need and almost without fail poison the bill with a stupid religist amendment that side rails the legislation. If you do not know what I am referring to you are as dense as you are repetitive.

OK then, smart ass. What social legislation have they "attempted" to pass.

And I'm repetitive because you are evading the question

Life at Conception Act (2013 - H.R. 1091)

So religious control the Republican party and focus all that power on abortion skirmishes. There you have it, my point exactly

No, your point was that social conservatives have not gotten Republicans to do anything on their behalf in Congress.

I proved you wrong with a 10 second search for the link.

I guess "libertarians" don't admit when they are wrong.

 

[Synthaholic]

The founding fathers specified how to vote in Federal Elections. They did not specify how private organizations should vote.

Private organizations can't vote, dope.

And corporations aren't people, either.

What does that have to do with anything?

Just answering your post with a fact: you said "They did not specify how private organizations should vote."

What is the relevance of those "facts?" Are you thinking the people who comprise political parties and corporations lose their Constitutional rights because they organized?

The relevance is proving you wrong.

I'm thinking that private organizations should not be in charge of a Constitutional right.

I asked earlier, but you and every other Right-Winger dodged:

Would you be OK with a private organization setting rules on who could own a gun?

 

[Synthaholic]

Tax cuts trigger economic activity that offsets the decreased tax revenue.

That's been proven false.

Well, that's true in the sense that leftist lawyers tell you they know more economics than economists do and you believe them.

It's not true if you believe empirical data.

Tom-ay-to, tom-ah-to

Show me the empirical data that proves Bush's tax cuts were beneficial to the U.S. economy.

 

[SwimExpert]

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

Delegate Deception - Linkis.com

The only rigged clusterfuck I see is your continued perpetuation of this lie. The rules are determined at the beginning of every convention. It's been that way forever. Of course, you know that. You're a piece of shit, but you're not an idiot. You know damn well the way it has always been done. And yet, you insist on pushing this lie that all of a sudden it's "rigging" if this year's delegates adopt a set of rules you don't like.

Look, we understand that you desperate want Trump's massive penis inside of your mouth. You want to feel it throb against your tongue and choke out the back of your throat as it engorges. That's cool! It's your life, suck off whomever you want. But you don't have to lie just to have the opportunity.

 

[Synthaholic]

Just because you monitor doesn't help you chase down thousands of people across a thousand miles.

U.S. Army vehicles vs. illegals traveling on foot or piled into a truck.

Ooh, that's a tough one! So evenly matched!

Someone gets a big gun and blasts a hole in one spot and government converges there or they chase thousands of people individually across a thousand miles. And you don't get the difference, it's the same to you. LOL. You're not a smart boy. Here's a ball, look it's bouncy ...

We can successfully monitor and enforce a no-fly zone across all of Iraq all the way from Incirlik, Türkiye but the military is incompetent when it comes to a no-walk zone in Texas?

 

[hadit]

But yes, as a matter of fact, I support freedom for all groups of Americans to assemble peaceably and choose their own candidates to support in any way they wish.

No you don't. You support a private entity dictating to the voters who the nominee is going to be for the General Election.

Nonsense. I don't care who the green party nominates, or the communist, the working families, or the silly party, for that matter. Why should I use the power of the government to force parties to nominate any certain person? That flies in the face of every reasonable argument. Tell us, do you want the government to dictate to all of the dozens of parties whom they shall nominate?

 

[hadit]

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

Delegate Deception - Linkis.com

The only rigged clusterfuck I see is your continued perpetuation of this lie. The rules are determined at the beginning of every convention. It's been that way forever. Of course, you know that. You're a piece of shit, but you're not an idiot. You know damn well the way it has always been done. And yet, you insist on pushing this lie that all of a sudden it's "rigging" if this year's delegates adopt a set of rules you don't like.

Look, we understand that you desperate want Trump's massive penis inside of your mouth. You want to feel it throb against your tongue and choke out the back of your throat as it engorges. That's cool! It's your life, suck off whomever you want. But you don't have to lie just to have the opportunity.

Of course it's rigged, but the salient point is that it's always been that way, and for Trump or Bernie supporters to complain about it now is a bit too late, since both candidates entered the race with the full knowledge of what they were getting into. The party power structure knows which candidate they want, and will manipulate the process to push for that candidate.

 

[cereal_killer]

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?

Why have debates, why have voting, why have primaries? Primary or General, Americans should be allowed to vote and have that vote counted. Why does that confuse you so much?

 

[ZackB]

Why are you silly fuckers just now noticing how presidential candidates are selected?

 

[hadit]

The founding fathers specified how to vote in Federal Elections. They did not specify how private organizations should vote.

Private organizations can't vote, dope.

And corporations aren't people, either.

What does that have to do with anything?

Just answering your post with a fact: you said "They did not specify how private organizations should vote."

What is the relevance of those "facts?" Are you thinking the people who comprise political parties and corporations lose their Constitutional rights because they organized?

The relevance is proving you wrong.

I'm thinking that private organizations should not be in charge of a Constitutional right.

I asked earlier, but you and every other Right-Winger dodged:

Would you be OK with a private organization setting rules on who could own a gun?

I am fine with private organizations setting rules on who could bring a gun onto premises owned by the organization and what kind of guns they could bring. The same is true for political parties. They are determining who will be their standard bearer in the general election. Note that nothing is stopping those who do not get nominated from going to a different party that will nominate them, or from running completely independently. You are NOT forced to vote for any candidate from any political party. You can vote for yourself if you want. You do know that, don't you?

 

[hadit]

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?

Why have debates, why have voting, why have primaries? Primary or General, Americans should be allowed to vote and have that vote counted. Why does that confuse you so much?

And on election day, they do.

 

[hadit]

Why are you silly fuckers just now noticing how presidential candidates are selected?

Because, quite frankly, most people pay zero attention to the process and just assume that they have a choice of two people to vote for. Many apparently believe it's that way because of the law.

 

[kaz]

True, and sadly he'd still be an improvement over the last eight years.

I'll never understand the delusional conservative mind. By almost every measure Obama has improved American life from the day he took office.

It's not that hard to fathom the christian fundamentalists that have taken over the GOP. Every thing about them is based on a lie no mater how hard they continue to sell it. They claim ownership of American morality as if they invented it and own the patent. Growing up believing in total nonsense has prepared the neo cons for going with "the group" on all issues and beliefs, including that Obama is the worst American president in history. They have always rejected facts. When faced with facts they come back with their "faith" as the supposed equal theory to everything. They do not need nor accept any information that crosses what they take on faith. Practically ALL of their "information" is religion based or religists generated. They are the lowest and poorest informed group of people in American history. It has been a sad several decades for what was once a proud and strong political party. People like Dwight Eisenhower and Barry Goldwater were well informed and based in reality.

Only a fool can deny the progress towards solvency of our economy. The only fly in the ointment that stands out remains the bubble that Wall street is continuing to build. Obama has done little to nothing in reigning in this dangerous development. In all fairness the republicans in the position of power would do nothing to help him addressing Wall street's and the bank's influence in congress.

What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?

Civil Rights?

Not clear what that has to do with the discussion

 

[kaz]

No Arnold, I think that the internal workings of the parties aren't a government agency. How stupid are you?

So, you believe that private organizations should not be interfered with as they decide who our 2 choices for POTUS will be?

Dunno about Kaz, but are you saying private organizations SHOULD be interfered with as they decide who THEY are going to support for President?

I'm saying they shouldn't be allowed to operate as private organizations.

And that ... is why I keep pointing out that you're not liberals, you are authoritarian leftists.

How do you get past the Constitution on that? The general leftist authoritarian plan, ignore it? The commerce clause covers controlling political parties, right?

The Constitution says nothing about political parties.

No, it talks about the people who run and are in them. The Constitution doesn't say when you create an organization you lose your Constitutional rights. You're not following the discussion, are you?

 

[Synthaholic]

hy should I use the power of the government to force parties to nominate any certain person?

Not my argument, but please continue playing with yourself.

 

[kaz]

What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?

"What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?"

I'm sorry. I keep saying you are constantly mis reading my posts so I had to read this one again because I don't want to accuse you of being stupid without evidence. I didn't find a single word or group of words within the reply that states "social issues the republicans have passed". You are close though as they have ATTEMPTED to pass numerous pieces of legislation with versions of their moral agenda embedded within. That is one of their favorite tricks. They pretend to be addressing a valid need and almost without fail poison the bill with a stupid religist amendment that side rails the legislation. If you do not know what I am referring to you are as dense as you are repetitive.

OK then, smart ass. What social legislation have they "attempted" to pass.

And I'm repetitive because you are evading the question

Life at Conception Act (2013 - H.R. 1091)

So religious control the Republican party and focus all that power on abortion skirmishes. There you have it, my point exactly

No, your point was that social conservatives have not gotten Republicans to do anything on their behalf in Congress.

I proved you wrong with a 10 second search for the link.

I guess "libertarians" don't admit when they are wrong.

I see, so in the discussion about your claim religious control the Republican party, you think that minor abortion skirmishes are what they have chosen to do with all that power. Having made your point, I have a problem admitting I'm wrong.

Actually, you do. Obviously they don't control the Republican party, you just like the talking point