Posted on 04/17/2016 4:34:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
You hear it all the time: “The system is rigged.” On so many issues, people wrap themselves in this abdication of individual responsibility to insulate themselves from the negative consequences of their decisions and actions. Still others use it to empower themselves, acting as political Pope and absolving others of their mistakes.
Context matters. In some cases, the system is rigged. In others, the system itself is doing the rigging.
Nowhere has the “the system is rigged” theme been more commonly used than in the political world.
Donald Trump cries it every time he loses, every time he realizes he’s been outsmarted, every time it’s clear he’s in over his head and didn’t hire competent people who understand, or even read, clearly stated rules. But his refrain is hollow and damaging only to those to whom he’s lying.
The more nefarious usage of the phrase comes from the recipient of Trump’s political donations – Hillary Clinton.
When a politician, particularly the standard bearer of a major political party, complains “the system is rigged” against people getting ahead, it’s the same as telling them they should quit. It saps those susceptible to such things of their ambition, their drive.
When you say this to people who, because of skin color, sexuality, economic status or whatever, already may be receptive to the idea, it resonates – maybe not that day, but someday. When something doesn’t go their way, the way something doesn’t go people’s way all the time, they now have an excuse.
The next time they fail to get a job or lose one, regardless of the circumstances, they can come more quickly to the “realization” the system is rigged against them and they can’t succeed no matter what.
Some people will quit, wait for some politician to “unrig” the system and become and remain loyal to that person and party who vows to “protect” them. It’s worked out swimmingly for the black community, hasn’t it? Now Democrats want to work their same magic to “help” Hispanics.
The vote is more important than lives to progressives. It’s power über alles.
Hillary claims the system is rigged? She rose from a middle-class family to marry a man from a poor family and then become one of the wealthiest and most powerful women in the world. Her story, like that of President Obama and so many other progressives, embodies the American Dream.
Why not just rely on that story, which would do a lot of good? Because it doesn’t give enough credit to government for her success.
“The system is rigged” absolves everyone of the responsibility of their mistakes. You went to prison not because you were doing something illegal, but because the system was rigged. You can’t afford rent not because you wasted your money on other things, but because the system is rigged. You have a crummy job not because you smoked a lot of weed in high school rather than studying, but because the system is rigged. The possibilities are endless, the blame – and the results – are the same.
If Hillary wants to talk about rigged systems, she knows all about one that truly is rigged – the Democratic Party’s nominating system.
She can’t win her party’s nomination without unelected party elites pushing her over the top, which her campaign acknowledged this week. Further, Tuesday’s primary in New York already is a victory for her before the first vote is counted. Unless Bernie Sanders, a fellow traveller in the “the system is rigged” brigade, beats her in a landslide, she will leave the state with significantly more delegates.
Yes, some systems are rigged. But not the ones most progressives would have you believe. The economy is not rigged. How delegates are won or lost may be, but everyone knows the rules.
No, the real rigging in most people’s lives is the lie that someone other than the individual is responsible for the state of our lives.
Looking externally for redemption, fulfillment, or making anything great again is the individual rigging the system against themselves. So maybe all the systems are rigged after all.
Both parties rig their systems.
The Democrats ‘superdelegates’ are a hedge against anyone who doesn’t follow the Uniparty line of talking Progressive and keeping the Crony Capitalists happy in the end.
The Republicans come up with a more complex system of allocating delegates that creates winner take all systems in some liberal states with the more conservative ones turned into proportional schemes.
In addition, the allocation of delegates in primaries is not related to the actual people selected. They get selected at party meetings where the insiders have control.
Here in PA the system separates most delegates from the popular vote with a separate election and only names on the ballot, no candidates linked to the names.
Local Republican elected officials who are the Establishment have the best name recognition on the lists of candidates and have often won most slots leaving folks like Ronald Reagan with only 10 percent of our state’s delegates in 1976 and 1980.
Then I guess you are part of the system.
For the most part, the system is not rigged. And “rigging” can be a matter of degree. A lot of rigging is not covert; it’s more like in your face.
There is some covert political corruption, complete with fraudulent voting. This can rig results in close elections.
Is there systemic discrimination based on race and sex in America? Yes. It is called affirmative action. It discriminates for some, hence it discriminates against others. It discriminates against white men.
This can mean a longer wait for promotion. Still, good work will usually be rewarded. Maybe a better metaphor than “rigging” is the difference between having the wind at your back versus walking into a headwind. Persevere.
Unions spend member dues as they see fit. If you are Republican, some of your dues dollars will be given to Democratic party politicians. You had no choice in joining the union if you wanted the job. Union jobs are in decline - good riddance.
Might your children be taught values that you abhor in government schools? Yes. A politician running with a vouchers platform will face determined resistance. Just think of all the public school dollars at risk. Perhaps a bigger problem is that many people are accustomed to “public” schools and see nothing wrong with taking tax dollars and spending contrary to the wishes of either the tax-payer or the wishes of individual parents.
Many of our systems are not perfect. While some may be improved, all could be easily made much worse. The “anything would be better than this” argument has been shown false with every communist revolution.
Yes, you have articulated it well. Thanks.
Everyone knows that the odds are set so that the casino takes in more money than it distributes in prizes. The casinos are not trying to hide that fact. This is different than claiming an obviously rigged system is completely fair, as happened in CO and WY.
Lots of citizens desire the same results of a successful Trump administration. Another point. Regaining institutional control after an epic election has to be done too and thought through.
Who are the individuals connected to the existing control levers? The Panama Papers reveal some major cash moving among the world political and business shakers/movers, and billions of dollars of public subsidized assets.
Trump will also need a international populous movement to help him withstand the international political double crosses/ false flag operations/ and corrupt World Wide Media!
No, not at all levels of government. If you are an ordinary person who has decided to work for the government, you have to live by a moral and ethical code that is far more strict than the majority of what you find in the private sector. You cannot, for example, invite vendors to come demonstrate their products and allow them to bring lunch for everyone, because that would constitute taking bribes from the vendors to buy their products. (Because a $10 lunch is the deciding factor whether I buy that $150,000 instrument.) You take ethics classes annually to teach you all of the ethical pitfalls waiting for you. If anything even looks like it might be unethical, we can't do it.
I believe that one reason the ethics laws are so strict for ordinary government employees is that the political class, our top level bosses, often commit egregious ethical violations.
No. I'd call that "apples and oranges".
Well, no, I'm not part of the system. I don't have any position or role within the party.
But I have a question for you. If Darryl Glenn could successfully "beat the system" in Colorado, why couldn't Donald Trump?
Yes the caucus system is old. Needed in the day when communications and travel were slow and expensive. It’s plus is that it does require real investment on the part of the voter.
I can’t get over how people are focused on the right to vote and forget the privilege and responsibility pieces. They want voting to be easy, convenient. No registration, no ID, no waiting in line. No thinking.
Our founding fathers had a real fear of mob rule. When a population is under stress, that population often makes seriously damaging decisions. Think Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood and Germany with Hitler. Our founding
Father’s searched earnestly for a system that would respect the will of the people and still guard against the dangers of the mob. They worked for a balance that would protect the small states interests as well as those of the larger states.
Before we go throwing a system away, we should spend at least as much thought on those same issues. Read “The Miracle at Philadelphia” to gain an understanding of what went on during the Constitutional Convention. Link to free PDF: http://www.steporebook.com/book/miracle-at-philadelphia-the-story-of-the-constitutional-convention-may-september-1787-24226-pdf.html. Study guides also available online.
There’s a belief among Trump and shared by his supporters that there is a fundamental right to vote in primaries because, after all, we’re a democracy as Trump has stated himself(falsely so, BTW). They believe because there is a right to vote in the general election, then because they can’t do it in a primary, they’re being disenfranchised. Now, maybe one can argue for changing the caucus system afterwards and the points made can be valid, but the rules as they are are what they were going into Colorado and it was Trump’s responsibility to know the rules.
A republic if you can keep it - Ben Franklin.
Regardless of what system we have, the result of any process depends on two things:
1) Do people educate themselves
2) Who shows up
The ignorance of the process by people on this site which attracts political junkies demonstrates how lazy we are to educate ourselves in this country where we take everything for granted.
People on this political site, people who donate money to campaigns, people who claim to be supporters of AFP, Heritage, FRC, NRA, etal dont show up.
The FR Georgia page lists over 50 FReepers in GA 5th Disrict and 30,000 R primary voters and only 0.015% show up to choose the delegates to the national convention? Of the hundreds of precincts over 95% of the precincts had ZERO people show up to vote for delegate.
If we dont show up and dont know the process, we have only ourselves to blame.
Now, although I reject people playing the victim card ... a victim of the establishment, the fact is that the establishment does do things of omission and comission to facilitate ignorance and lack of participation.
Omission. Just as many dont show up. Those who do show up only half-show up. At the GA 5th convention, one member of the credentials committee did not show up. The job fell to the one who did show up (the Trumpster who was slated and won a delegate slot to Cleveland). She had total control of the credentials and was not prepared. She made mistakes on who was, or was not, credentialed. She was not part of a conspiracy. She is a volunteer. She should be praised for the many thousands of volunteer hours she had dedicated to Trump and the cause. But she could not do it alone.
Omission. Those who do show up could do a better job of communicating when and where the meetings occur and what the significance is of those meetings. But they are volunteers and how many more hours should they volunteer when the rest of us are not volunteering anything?
Commission (sort of). At the GA 5th convention, the chair, parliamentarian, secretary and credentials chair ...those who controlled the conduct of the meeting were 4 of the 6 people on the slate created by the nominating committee.
When the chair and parliamentarian declared it would require a 2/3 vote to reject the slate they were on the appearance of conflict of interest arose. Due to extensive conversations with them, I can say that this was not part of a conscious plan or conspiracy. They had just not thought it through.
Commission (true conspiracy). I have not seen this in GA where Ive been 3 years. But it definitely did exist in the past in IL. When Bob Kjellander (Karl Rove college roomate) ran the IL GOP and the RNC as Treasurer, controller of the money and paid staff on behalf of Rove there was definitely a conscious conspiracy of House Speaker Hastert of Kjellander’s IL GOP closed club to keep outside the club anyone who was not a member.
They didnt want nobody what nobody sent, as Mike Royko describes IL politicians.
But even during those dark years in IL, the anti-establishment Republicans could win when they worked hard and worked smart eg Sen Peter Fitzgerald. We lost many times. And when we lost, it was always because we did not educate and prepare ourselve and/or we did not show up... and since there was a massive effort to educate and get people to show up we have only ourselves to blame that we lost.
those ethics have migrated into many corporations.
in my job, I can not accept gratuities. also, the companies with which I deal are not allowed to buy me lunch generally but often do, cheap lunch. the one on one benefits more than the prohibition.
Except when there are the vendor’s customer”s reps involved and the lunch quality can grow and I am permitted to join the group for the better lunch.
This past week, the guy I was visiting had to take time out for an ethics training session . the subject of lunch was not mentioned and was an apparently settled set of procedures.
No it is not the same rigged rules that get one corrupt all. Rules rigged to get Romney or McCain got us the kenyan they could get us Shillarry
The underlying problem is, of course, that it’s not “rigged” in his favor.
In Fla,a winner take all state, Trump got all of Fla delegates with less than 50% of the vote and not a word from anyone.
The underlying problem is, of course, that it’s not “rigged” in his favor.
In Fla,a winner take all state, Trump got all of Fla delegates with less than 50% of the vote and not a word from anyone.
BTTT
Sorry, but I blame those who sat on their butts on the 2008 and 2012 general elections just because they did not like the nominees.
They valued their own self esteem more than America
Both came to the convention with a vast majority of the delegates, fairly won, and they thereby secured the nomination.
The rules did't have to be "rigged in their favor" for Romney and McCain to become the nominees. Instead, a relatively weak field of candidates made their nomination inevitable.
POST OF THE YEAR!!!
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.