Posted on 04/18/2016 6:21:53 AM PDT by don-o
It depends on what the definition of “rigged” is. The word communicates nefarious intent and some seem convinced that it is clear that this is the current situation and, finally, their schemes and machinations have been exposed. Perhaps just a bit of reflection can provide another way to think about this.
Did the Founding Fathers “rig” the Republic that they established with the Declaration and Constitution? If we can eliminate nefarious intent from the definition of that word, then I submit that they did. Did they wish the “voice of the people” to be heard? I submit that they did (consent of the governed).
They accomplished this by means of dispersing power as widely as possible. One example is the legislative power. The House of Representatives is elected directly for a short term so it is responsive to the will of the people, Why not just leave it there? The short answer is they were wary of unmitigated democracy. They had read their history. So, they added a second legislative body, the Senate, with longer terms and election by state legislatures (a different voice of the people) rather than direct vote of the people.
Though the Constitution never speaks of political parties and how they might organize themselves, it is reasonable to assert that the same principle of dispersed power is a good thing for organizing and administering one. Make places for the House principle and the Senate principle. But why would a party think it needs to disperse power at all? And, more importantly, who gets their hands on the reins of political power and how do they do it? Is it all done in the dark? Of course not.
It’s pretty basic. A person who wants power and influence in party affairs has to show up.
And that was perfectly in accordance with the Constitution.
Santorum showed up in 2012. He won 40.3 percent of the vote on the convention floor. e won the caucuses and he won the straw vote on the convention floor. WON as in by 5 points over Romney
Who got the delegates?
Santorum 40.3% = 06 delegates
Romney 34.9% = 13 delegates
Gingrich 12.8% = 00 delegates
R Paul 11.8% = 05 delegates
Tell me that wasn’t rigged for Romney
Tell me it wasn’t rigged
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/states/colorado
It would be interesting to look at the debates about direct election of presidential electors. Interesting you would mention that, in light of Ben Carson’s advocating for elimination of the Electoral College.
You demonstrate an unusually high level of understanding of how the USA began. My question to you is what percentage of Americans do you think would read your post and say that you have no idea what you are talking about? I think a very high percentage would refuse to believe it without even asking for clarification.
Thanks for the post, don-o,
As it is said, “90% of succeeding is showing up!”
With this constant chatter about rigging the nomination process, I wonder why a party has a convention? It would seem to be futile if a nominee is chosen by sheer votes. Why don’t we just succumb to the polls? Was a democracy promised, or a republic? Why have elections?
I once sat in a clinic by a major college basketball head coach. He was asked why his teams seemingly always beat prohibitive favorites. He merely said that the jerseys of the two teams are not laid at mid court and a vote occurs. He said the game must be played, and the victor is the group that leaves it all between the lines. There is no shame in losing if all effort and energy is left on the court.
It seems to this poor, old, slow, dumb, country lawyer that one candidate is coasting and not putting forth full effort. But, there are other candidates which are now being criticized for leaving it all on the field/court. I don’t know about you - but to me, that attitude is un-American.
Gwjack
P.S. What is the latest on the Waco ordeal? Thanks in advance.
Fine. I’ll tell you.
It wasn’t rigged.
If you don’t like the rules, get off your ass, get down to the Monthly GOP meetings in your Precinct, and convince them to change the rules. We VOTE on changes to the State Party platform EVERY election cycle.
Also worth noting that was in a day before mass communications, which meant that the average voter might have access to only very limited information about a candidate. Perhaps better to let elected representatives who would know a lot more about each candidate make the decision.
I just think it's interesting when some folks complain that the GOP nominating system is "unconstitutional", or at least inconsistent with Constitutional principles. In truth, it's actually very consistent.
I would have no problem if my state legislators picked the electors, that would at least be representative. The re-pubic-can party insiders club is not representative.
A sidebar at the page you linked explains...
2012 Caucus Process
Delegate Allocation: None of Colorado's 36 delegates will be bound to any candidate as a result of the Feb. 7 precinct caucuses. The state's delegates will be elected at county assemblies, held mostly on March 24, but before March 28, and allocated at district and state conventions in mid-April.
Under current rules, a football team does not win by accumulating more total yardage that the opponent. But, that could be the case, if the rules were changed. If you want a winner take all result, or proportional result based on popular vote, you have to get the rules in that order.
Sorry for the crazy talk.
“It’s pretty basic. A person who wants power and influence in party affairs has to show up.”
_____________
They have been showing up. And at this point millions more have showed up to cast their vote for Donald Trump than any of his rivals.
Trump will arrive at the convention with—at a bare minimum—well over 90% of the delegates needed. (I actually think he’ll arrive with over 1237, but that’s another matter). At no time since the founding of the GOP in 1854 has a candidate with this sort of support been denied the nomination. Cruz will be millions of votes, and hundreds of delegates behind. Simply stated, to hand Cruz the nomination in these circumstances would rightly be seen as a steal. It won’t fly.
Of course the process is rigged.
My oldest daughter moved out of state 22 years ago, and yet at every election, her signature is scrawled in above mine as having voted, when I go to vote and sign in.
I mentioned it the first dozen times, and now I’ve given up.
The election people are the problem.
So votes don’t matter. The party bosses choose. In fact the caucus doesn’t matter because Santorum won the caucus
You can’t spin this. Even if the party was completely honest and believed they were acting in the best interest of the party they look unethical.
The fact that they eliminated the straw poll that Santorum won just makes it more so
Simply stated? Well, yes, I guess it it. It is also a vapid argument that ignores the reality of the process. But, that is common lately.
‘Simply stated, to hand Cruz the nomination in these circumstances would rightly be seen as a steal. It won’t fly.’
Exactly. While Cruz supporters are so busily defending the rules, their candidate is sliding in the polls. Trump, meanwhile, is ticking up.
So what do Cruz supporters do? Double down on the rules. Because, you know, the further Cruz sinks in the polls, the more rules he’s going to need to bail him out.
Interesting story. Who did you mention it to?
I've never paid any attention to that stuff myself, although my state has a primary so maybe that's why. But if I want to change something about the way the GOP functions in my state, I'd have to get involved with the party itself. Go do meetings, etc.. I don't do that stuff, and I expect most of the rest of us don't either.
Nonsense. There is no doubling down. The rules are there in black and white. Of course, the rules apply to participants who are fully active in the process.
I've not seen a rule that give a good result for whining.
That being said, I renew my hope for a Trump/Cruz alliance at some point, assuming of course that Trump does not achieve a first ballot victory.
Simple answer is yes. The parties want to keep the power they have accumulated
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.