Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Gandalf_The_Gray

For starters, we need to figure out exactly how so many other capable candidates were left behind or defeated in the Republican primary/caucus selection process.


65 posted on 04/26/2012 12:17:05 AM PDT by faithhopecharity (why is illicit sex good politically for only one party's politicians?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: faithhopecharity
As you now there's this term "RINO" that gets tossed around. Many believe it means LIBERAL, yet, in reality, it initially meant a DEMOCRAT (or fringe party) politician who sought office by running as a REPUBLICAN.

Most RINOS were found in Southern States.

Modernizing it just a little you find that RINOS ARE POLITICIANS whose political leanings are something other than classical Republican or Conservative yet they seek office as Republicans, or they support such people with time and money.

Several months ago I went through the political career backgrounds of all the Republican candidates for President. At the time there were 10 such people. 7 of them had questionable non-Republican party ties or events in their backgrounds. They were then, in fact, arguably RINOS.

Lots of Freepers were campaigning for those RINOS. So there's your answer about "Exactly how so many other capable candidates were left behind or defeated"

79 posted on 04/26/2012 3:37:46 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: faithhopecharity
For starters, we need to figure out exactly how so many other capable candidates were left behind or defeated in the Republican primary/caucus selection process.

I think the posted article gave a pretty good hint. The selection process is already over before the primaries begin. We vote and caucus like good party members, shoveling money into the candidates campaigns (and even more into the parties war chest). Meanwhile the media pundits publish polls designed to winnow the ranks of the candidates. The party pressures candidates w/ "low" numbers to withdraw and presto we have a presumptive winner w/o the required number of electors to win which is not a problem because all the rejected candidates (except Newt) are being "good sports" and are falling all over themselves saying "here take mine".

I would feel much better about the process if all candidates campaigned w/ a set budget, funded from the treasury, with no personal funds allowed. Such campaigning to end at a set date followed by a single night of primaries with every state participating in a statewide vote (caucus is what you do to a leaky boat). I'd feel even better if all states ran their elections with photo ID.

If DOJ thinks requiring photo ID disenfranchises voters what about me voting in the Wisconsin primary when the final decision has already been made? There is no point in a Wisconsin primary so the entire state has been "disenfranchised"!

The system is inherently corrupt and is open to manipulation by the party elite (and you better bet they like it that way). Money is the lifeblood of politics and as long as we leave funding campaigns a private affair millionaires will buy Senate seats and billionaires will buy the Presidency. So it was, so it shall ever be...
Unless we the people...
Change...
The...
Rules!!!

Regards,
GtG

132 posted on 04/26/2012 9:49:19 AM PDT by Gandalf_The_Gray (I live in my own little world, I like it 'cuz they know me here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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