Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: zerosix

Are you saying that all the winner take all states have changed?? My state (MO) is one.


98 posted on 01/14/2012 5:03:12 PM PST by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: llandres
Yes, many states have changed their rules away from the "winner take all" to proportional.

This does extend the primary period as well as giving candidates the opportunity to become better known.

The additional debates, even those that are run by the idiots at various MSMs, enlist additional exposure to the so-called "second tier" candidates that would have never been given any exposure.

Instead of forcing candidates without mega buck supporters, to drop out (as happened in '08 with McLame) can raise some money to continue.

The establishment didn't necessarily warm up to this rule because they like and expect to pick the candidate "most likely to win" (in their opinion, i.e. Dole & McLame).

More people and more states have the opportunity to be included in the choice.

This is why the "establishment" along with their willing allies in the MSM continue to proclaim various people as "non-electable" and also why people who should know better, to accept that view - sad as those are the same people who loathe the MSM and complain about how "unfair" they are, as well as those knowing that this same group are cheerleaders for Obama and will do everything to destroy the Republican candidate. These people will still accept the premise that only Romney is "electable."

108 posted on 01/15/2012 12:46:57 PM PST by zerosix (native sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson