Democrat Wins California Special Election for Congress

[mamooth]

You totally miss the "strategy" here for the Top 2 scam-ola. Repubs put 6 candidates on the Primary ballot because that party is basically stupid and allows THEIR vote to split 6 ways. But Repub voters WANT max choice in a primary and the Dem party is EXCELLENT in their Soviet style of dissuading candidate choice. (Look at the last Prez primary for proof).. So parties that offer CHOICE in candidates are punished.

In A First, Two Republicans May Advance In Washington Treasurer Race

In that Washington State Treasurer jungle primary, the 3 Democrats got 52% of the vote, but it was the two Republicans who got 48% of the vote that ended up moving on to the general election.

So, by your standards, that proves how Republicans are Soviets out to punish those offering more choice in elections. Yet you're only screaming at Democrats. Your outrage is rather selective, which means it can't be taken seriously.

And it THEIR FUCKING PRIMARY. Not a "people's primary". So even if parties choose to nominate by convention or caucus (like the Libertarians for instance) -- they STILL would be excluded from the General.

Those dastardly Republicans. Oh wait. You don't mind when Republicans do it. Never mind.

Not only does this guarantee the Majority party SOLE POSSESSION of a general election, but it EXCLUDES ANY OTHER INDIE or 3rd PARTY CHOICES from the General Election. Wanna take a poll on how many people (outside of the Borg community in Cali) would call a ballot with ONE PARTY on it "UnAmerican"??

I think most people would point out it's dishonest to pretend there wasn't a primary election where all parties participated.

I PERSONALLY FOUGHT this proposal in Cali for YEARS with the LParty. It was always a top priority. They tried it SEVERAL times and we defeated it. It's a NIGHTMARE for political choice. And I was shocked to see the Politburo finally succeed in KILLING voter choice a few years ago. So glad I bailed.

So, libertarians now get almost no votes in the primary instead of getting almost no votes the general. I can see how upsetting that would be.

Of course you don't get it. You're all signed up for any voter disenfranchisement that it takes to WIN and hold power.

Oh, I get it. When they do the same things, you curse the Democrats, but give a big thumbs up to the Republicans. You're just looking for bad excuses to hate Democrats.

 

[flacaltenn]

In that Washington State Treasurer jungle primary, the 3 Democrats got 52% of the vote, but it was the two Republicans who got 48% of the vote that ended up moving on to the general election.

You're not getting this... I don't give a fuck which 2 make it to a General Ballot.. If that General Election Ballot does NOT offer but ONE party choice --- that's political tyranny and UnAmerican. And you had to find a "TREASURER" race on the Left coast to make that irrelevant point? REPUBS didn't push "Top 2".. YOUR party did.. The party of Systemic Disenfranchisement.

 

[Darkwind]

A Democratic candidate just won a special election in California for a congressional seat.

Jimmy Gomez wins Los Angeles congressional election to replace Xavier Becerra

It's not a surprise that a Democrat won, being two Democrats were running. Jungle primaries (all primary candidates run on the same slate, and the two top vote-getters move on) can lead to such results.

Yes, it was a safe blue district.

However, after the Montana special election in a safe red district, the Republicans on this forum were unanimously declaring that such things don't matter, and a Republican win in a safe red district there meant the Democrats were doomed.

Montana House Seat...The Right just keeps on winning

So, by their own snowflake standards, the Republicans have admitted that this latest Democrat win means the Republicans are doomed.

(I love hoisting the kooks with their own petards.)

It isn't any one particular election that has Democrats doomed. It is their world view that dooms them.

Have a nice day.

 

[mamooth]

You're not getting this... I don't give a fuck which 2 make it to a General Ballot..

You clearly do, being how you keep crying that 2 Democrats made it to the general.

If that General Election Ballot does NOT offer but ONE party choice --- that's political tyranny and UnAmerican.

Good, then we expect to see you calling the Republicans Soviets for a change. After all, just look at all those jungle primaries that advance two Republicans, or look at those rural red districts with nobody but a Republican on the ballot. According to you, that means the Republicans are most Soviet party in history.

And you had to find a "TREASURER" race on the Left coast to make that irrelevant point? REPUBS didn't push "Top 2".. YOUR party did.. The party of Systemic Disenfranchisement.

Do your party talking points give you comfort in these dark days when you can no longer hide how your party is the most corrupt political organization in US history? And you love them all the more for it. I'm just making it clear where we both stand. You support the most corrupt party in American history, and we don't.

 

[flacaltenn]

Good, then we expect to see you calling the Republicans Soviets for a change. After all, just look at all those jungle primaries that advance two Republicans, or look at those rural red districts with nobody but a Republican on the ballot. According to you, that means the Republicans are most Soviet party in history.

Again -- because of that density that's on display -- It was not Greens, or Indies or Lib Party or Repubs that PUSHED AND FORCED that "Top Two" abortion of Democracy on the folks of those states.

Imagine waking up on voting day and finding out NONE of "your" candidates are even on the ballot..

Who PUSHED and FORCED this crushing blow to Voter Choice??? -- the Disenfranchising Soviets in the Dem camp...

Focus.. When the Repubs try to drop the Mother of all Bombs on Democracy -- I'll be there.

 

[mamooth]

Again -- because of that density that's on display -- It was not Greens, or Indies or Lib Party or Repubs that PUSHED AND FORCED that "Top Two" abortion of Democracy on the folks of those states.

Let's see. 4 states use such a system.

Alaska and Louisiana are very Republican.

California is very Democratic.

In Washingon, it was done by a voter initiative, and both political parties opposed it.

So, it makes no sense for you to keep screaming it's a Democratic conspiracy. Therefore, you'll keep doing it.

 

[flacaltenn]

California is very Democratic.

Not any more. It's more a Democratic Tyranny state. Initiative booklets are 60 pages long and 2% of the public actually reads that stuff. The Legislature is just TOO chicken to do any real work. And they'll put 10 or 12 bills and Bond issues out as initiatives so they don't take the heat. They should all just go home, because the budget is on auto-pilot anyways..

Louisiana doesn't do a strict "Top 2". They have a torturous, Byzantine era system of run-offs. And I don't know what the hell is wrong with Alaska -- but they are not strict Repubs. More like 18th Century personal survival Liberals.

Look up THIS GUY -- inventor of the "top 2" system for NON federal elections in Louisiana. A real gem he is..

Alaska Bill for a Top-Two Primary; Inventor of “Top-Two” Election System is Released from Federal Prison

On January 13, former Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards was released from federal prison. See this story. Edwards is the person who invented the “top-two” election system. He not only persuaded the Louisiana legislature to pass the idea in 1975; he also carried on a high-powered campaign to persuade the U.S. Justice Department, Voting Rights Section, to approve the idea. The Department had previously rejected the idea when Mississippi had passed it.

Edwards believed the top-two system would make it easier for conservative Democrats to continue to win elections in Louisiana. Louisiana has been using that system for state and local elections for the past 35 years. Louisiana used it for congressional elections between 1978 and 2006, and during those years, no incumbent member of either House of Congress was ever defeated for re-election (except in 1992 when, because of redistricting, incumbents had to run against each other).

PSSST -- Mammy -- The guy who invented it to preserve Dem power in Louisiana -- is an actual Democrat. Also an ex-con.. Don't fuck with me on this stuff. This is where I've been PRACTICING politics for 25 years.. In keeping the election rules and ballot access OPEN so voters can have choices..

 

[Lumpy 1]

Really scraping crap out of the bottom of an old pickle barrel here. The news is -- don't EVER allow a power mad party to capture the political process and pass onerous "Top 2" rules for primaries that GUARANTEE a good old fashioned 60's Soviet one party system.

You're not making any sense. If the Democrats had enough votes to take the two top spots in the primaries, they would have easily won the general. And the voters had a choice between parties, in the primaries. But then, you're just out to vomit sick hatred at Democrats, not to make sense.

Brooking studied jungle primaries.

The Primaries Project: Blanket Primaries Have Yet to Deliver | Brookings Institution
---
As the table below shows, over 80% of the primary outcomes maintain ‘Democrat versus Republican’ contests for the general election. However, of the exceptions, all five of the ‘Democrat versus Democrat’ races are in “solid Democrat” districts, according to The Cook Political Report, and all three ‘Republican versus Republican’ races are in “solid Republican” districts.
---

Why weren't you screaming deranged nonsense about how those Republican vs. Republican matchups revealed a power mad Stalinist Republican party? You'd look less hypocritical now if you had done so, less like a corrupt Republican party shill.

Everyone is trying to get an early look at what 2018 will be like.

It is way too early to tell.

If the Democrats can't pin some crime on Trump, they got nothin... no plans, no legislation, zero accomplishments but they will have a history of eating crow, whining and wasting plenty of working class Americans taxes.

 

[mamooth]

Not any more. It's more a Democratic Tyranny state.

Fascinating, how you define "winning elections" as tyranny. But only in blue states. You adore red states with such "tyranny". Such double standards are why you're not taken seriously.

Instead of whining about losing, why not do what Democrats do, and have policies that voters like? Instead of doing that, you resort to disenfranchising through gerrymandering and voter suppression, and projecting your own virulently anti-democratic nature on to the non-authoritarians.

 

[flacaltenn]

Not any more. It's more a Democratic Tyranny state.

Fascinating, how you define "winning elections" as tyranny. But only in blue states. You adore red states with such "tyranny". Such double standards are why you're not taken seriously.

Instead of whining about losing, why not do what Democrats do, and have policies that voters like? Instead of doing that, you resort to disenfranchising through gerrymandering and voter suppression, and projecting your own virulently anti-democratic nature on to the non-authoritarians.

It's all about winning to you guys. Would never "waste votes" on principles or actual preference. That's why -- both parties are making LOSERS out of all of us.. The LOSING just keeps multiplying..

 

[radical right]

It's all about winning to you guys. Would never "waste votes" on principles or actual preference. That's why -- both parties are making LOSERS out of all of us.. The LOSING just keeps multiplying..

The democrats are a diverse group, rich poor, black white, jew gentile. And that's just it's members of congress.

Congressional republicans are the least diverse group in history.

 

[Thinker101]

It's all about winning to you guys. Would never "waste votes" on principles or actual preference. That's why -- both parties are making LOSERS out of all of us.. The LOSING just keeps multiplying..

The democrats are a diverse group, rich poor, black white, jew gentile. And that's just it's members of congress.

Congressional republicans are the least diverse group in history.

Yet the democrats are having so much difficulty with a President that is not a politician.

 

[flacaltenn]

It's all about winning to you guys. Would never "waste votes" on principles or actual preference. That's why -- both parties are making LOSERS out of all of us.. The LOSING just keeps multiplying..

The democrats are a diverse group, rich poor, black white, jew gentile. And that's just it's members of congress.

Congressional republicans are the least diverse group in history.

I'm not getting baited into discussing 2 archaic power whore dynasty parties that need to die and are KILLING my country... The "big middle" and 3rd parties are gonna have GREAT days in coming elections..

 

[radical right]

The "big middle" and 3rd parties are gonna have GREAT days in coming elections..

Ross Perot, Jill Stein, Ralph Nader.

Good luck with that

 

[flacaltenn]

The "big middle" and 3rd parties are gonna have GREAT days in coming elections..

Ross Perot, Jill Stein, Ralph Nader.

Good luck with that

It's not about WINNING party pest -- It's about LEADERSHIP, IDEAS, and less noise and tribal warfare..
YOU lost. Largely because the "Big Middle" confounded the pollsters and the 3rd parties and Indies sucked up an unprecedented 6% of the pop vote...

There were TWO governors on the last ticket. Both with two terms of state leadership. The LParty offered up a valid ticket and a Mediation Team that would END the tribal wars with Johnson/Weld.


When folks get fed up with the Roman Circuses and stop REWARDING your parties for DOING NOTHING but finger-pointing, fighting like spoiled brats and making things worse --- You'll understand what voting for principles and leadership is -- once again.. Instead of voting to "win"..

Since you're a Dem -- YOU ought to be asking yourself right now --- Does finger-pointing, fighting like spoiled brats and making things worse really make an appealing list of things to run on?