Replies

A lot of these opinions annoy me, but this one is the worst. Let's go:

Of course you couldn't make your point without hurling insults, but OK.

First: Idiots voting is a terrible way to decide anything. In a final-choice election to fill a Federal or state office, especially with two and only two candidates running, I suppose it's at least as good as divine appointment or something else. But to NOMINATE one of many, with the BASIS that this is the strongest one, and the GOAL of winning that later, idiots voting contest? Absurd.

Was it the "idiots" fault that Bachmann, who was winning, gaffed herself out of the race? Or that Cain, who was winning later, either couldn't control himself if the accusations were true or caved under false and easily refuted accusations otherwise? Or that Newt had a woman problem? Or that Freepers so readily attacked each other's Conservative choices that when it was finally over, Romney was the only one left?

And how do you propose to Constitutionally prevent "idiots" from voting?

Second: Therefore, in a perfect world, I would do away with primaries. They are a novelty, historically, and they have not served us well. Since I can't do that, I would: ELIMINATE (or not allow the results of) "open" primaries. They can do nothing but harm. RESTRICT voting in a GOP primary to REAL (as opposed to enrolled) Republicans. A real Republican is someone who is active in campaigns, who signs or otherwise acknowledges the platform, or who has donated to the party in the last two election cycles. At a MINIMUM, require party registration for the last four years, consecutively.

I actually agree with some of that.

Third: Require 2/3 of elected delegates, and 2/3 of appointed delegates (Governors, Senators, and Representatives, State or Federal) to concur in a nominee. The role of the "House of Elected Officials" is to bring the experience of winners into the process.

That might be a good idea, but remember that those making the appointment will have been elected by the same "idiots" you lamented above.

Your assertion that Romney (who I love, and for whom I am very sad about the bum rap he is about to get) "won" anything decisively is absurd. More than 3/5 of voters in contested primaries, all across the fruited plain, wanted someone else.

Talk about polishing a turd. "Someone else" got 3/5 according to your figures. Divide that up among how many candidates, and they were all beaten decisively.

Also remember that when it finally came down to Romney and Newt, Romney still won handily.

THIS IS A BAD SIGN FOR THE FALL. Even if Romney had WON, rather than LOST, 60-75% of primary voters, IF THE ANTI-ROMNEY VOTERS COULD NOT BE RECONCILED, THEN HE WAS A POOR CHOICE. It appears that this is exactly what happened.

And what is you solution? "In summary, the GOP nomination process needs less "democracy", not more (I don't give two sh*ts what the Democrats do), and it MUSTMUSTMUST make it impossible for a plurality (another word for minority) to choose the nominee."? How do they go about doing that? I like you idea of getting "2/3 of appointed delegates to concur in a nominee", but how would that have resulted in a nominee other than Romney?

Romney won the primary. He wasn't my choice, but when it was over, he was who we had to go with.

how do you propose to Constitutionally prevent "idiots" from voting?

First, there is no constitutional or any other right to vote in a Primary election. Primary elections are the creatures of the political parties, who can do whatever they want.

Secondly, there is no constitutional right to vote, at all. Especially in the case of the Presidency, it would be perfectly constitutional for a State Legislature to appoint its Electors, or choose them by lottery. The Constitution does place limits on what QUALIFICATIONS states may impose on voters (sex, age, race, poll tax) but states certainly could require solving Rubik's cube within 5 minutes or anything else desirable.

My post, however, accepted the notion of idiots voting in the general election. Getting them out of the primaries, where they don't belong and have no right to be, was my subject.

And, if you took what I said about your opinion to be "hurling insults", I apologize sincerely.