Posted on 04/26/2016 10:52:16 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
For the past month, a media narrative has taken hold that something must be done to reform, simplify, streamline, and democratize the delegate selection system of the Republican presidential nomination process.
Is our GOP presidential primary system rigged, meaning it is corrupt because it favors the establishment? Is it convoluted, arbitrary, arcane...and too often "voteless"? Is it wrong to allow "Trojan horse" delegates to change their vote on the second ballot of the national convention? Why do we have a separate election for delegates after we vote for candidates?
The system is not rigged, convoluted, arbitrary, arcane, or voteless. It is a system that encourages the grassroots to participate in party platform issues, the selection of candidates, the choosing of a candidate winner, and the allocation of party resources. The system is designed to keep the party alive and well by allowing current ideas and candidates to be tested and new ideas and candidates to be heard.
Here is what I mean. If you think the primary system we have now is no good, try imagining this: each state and territory holds an open election, the delegates are assigned proportionally to reflect the vote, and those delegates are committed to hold to that candidate for, say, the first 10 ballots. That way you have a pure vote, a fairly precise correlation between how the people vote and how the delegates vote, and no double-crossing on the subsequent ballots. Simple, clean, and easily explained to the voters by the news media.
Under this imagined Pure-Vote system, you would have chaos. In this 2016 cycle, Trump would have 20% fewer delegates as of today, with little chance of getting a majority, ever – unless he were to negotiate for Kasich's and Rubio's delegates before the convention.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“Every state is winner take all, just like general election”
Every state is not winner take all in the general election.
“Why not a proportional system?”
I think the answer to that question is obvious: it doesn’t benefit Trump.
That’s what we voted for, and we are fine with it. Trump won every county except Miami-Dade.
What did Colorado vote for? How many counties did Colorado voters award to Cruz?
Why don’t you take your Cruz talking points and stuff them up your Cruz.
In no way did I make any point for your BS argument. The system is rigged and was rigged against the outsider. Its still a rigged system. Trump turned it against the people who were supposed to win. That does not negate the fact its was designed to ensure the Party picks who wins the nomination - not the voters.
Because the presidential preference poll was abandoned, Republican voters in Colorado could not vote for any of the presidential candidates by name.
That said, the alternative was not, as Mr. Trump seems to imply, the coronation of Mr. Cruz by Republican party elites.
Though there was no presidential preference poll, Colorado voters participated in precinct caucuses to directly elect delegates—each of whom expressed a particular candidate preference—to the county assemblies, which in turn chose the makeup of the congressional-district and state conventions which would select the official national convention delegates.
Therefore, in practice, the Colorado caucuses did permit voters to cast ballots for the nominee of their preference through the direct election of county delegates.
Complicated, perhaps. Rigged? Not at all.
The rules of the GOP Colorado caucuses are readily available online. SEE HERE:
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/CO-R
Though they are complex, they are not difficult to grasp, and the rules clearly state how the process operates. And with respect to fairness, the mechanics of the caucuses were completely aboveboard.
The vigorous debate within the state party last August about dealing away with the presidential preference poll occurred in full view of the public and culminated in a unanimous decision from the Colorado Republican Party’s executive committee to change the process to its current form.
Mr. Trump had just as much time as all of the other candidates to prepare a campaign strategy that would succeed, and he was more than capable of posting a decent showing there had he made an effort to organize in the state. But no such effort was expended, and Mr. Trump lost.
Last question -— Is there a better alternative to the current system?
Turning from Donald Trump’s specific criticisms of the Colorado caucuses, I wonder what sort of primary election process he would propose to replace the unrepresentative and opaque system which he claims we have now.
Since I don’t have him to talk to, maybe you can propose a better one...
The problem with the influx of new voters into our system is that many of them were to stoned to listen, or lacked the IQ to understand 9th grade political science class.
Who served as president starting in 1992 and ending in January of 2001?
Get back to us when you’ve figured it out.
That person had less than 50% of the popular vote, twice.
We can’t force folks to register.
We can’t force them to vote.
We can only look at what the majority of people have decided, and run with it.
Delegates can do no better, and yet they are only a middleman.
How has that middle-man process worked with this Republican Congress?
Please explain how those middle-men protected this nation and us.
My vote is sacred, and if you don’t like it, too f’n bad!
The caucuses are as corrupt as they can be.
Facts are facts, but PERCEPTION is reality.
It makes no difference, if it gets people to the voting booth, its done its job.
Go Trump.
Checking ....
It is because the rules are counter to the voter. Screw the corrupt delegates!! It is the voters that count!
AND, the voter total dictates how the delegate vote!!
The states and political parties could both be crushed by a nationwide same-day jungle primary with the top two facing off in the general election.
‘Careful what you wish for’ is wise advice.
”Article II, Section 1, Clause 2: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.…
12th Amendment: The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; ..."
So how can the primary system not be rigged?
Umm, sorry that is incorrect, at least by the GOP party rules. You have to be registered 30 days prior the caucus.
Hmm...
Also, the delegates to the state convention ARE NOT SELECTED by the GOPe. They are selected by the local grass roots mom and pop republicans who voted on and for their neighbors.
Yes it is.
Most times, the later primaries are inconsequential. This year, they are not.
The system is rigged to support the system (and the professional politicians who designed it). The system is designed to keep insurgency candidates from succeeding.
Because the later primaries have consequence this year, the underlying system itself is being exposed to many who never have peered into that dark space. And many of these new viewers do not care for what they see.
Thanks for restating what I did.
It’s so much better when I read it from you.
“Every state is not winner take all in the general election.”
My mistake, only 48 states are winner take all
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.