Rule changes made by the RNC

[whatever67]

I don't have much of a problem with the way we elect a Republican except that if there really is a way to "parachute in" some non-running candidate, someone who didn't do the hard work of campaigning, but is desired by the establishment people in WA, that is egregiously UN-Democratic, un-American and disgusting!

Now Priebus says that's not going to happen. Hopefully, that is true.

And then there is the 1237. That is not the proper number IMO

It should be 1500 because, as we can all see, a very unpopular candidate can get elected with the 1237 number as the goal.

:think:

 

[patrick jane]

I don't have much of a problem with the way we elect a Republican except that if there really is a way to "parachute in" some non-running candidate, someone who didn't do the hard work of campaigning, but is desired by the establishment people in WA, that is egregiously UN-Democratic, un-American and disgusting!

Now Priebus says that's not going to happen. Hopefully, that is true.

And then there is the 1237. That is not the proper number IMO

It should be 1500 because, as we can all see, a very unpopular candidate can get elected with the 1237 number as the goal.

:think:

View attachment 23916

 

[Nick M]

I like the democrat rules. Mrs Clinton has gotten skunked in 6 of the last 7 states yet took the delegates in their rigged system.

 

[rexlunae]

I think there's essentially no winning for the Republicans. The current nomination process is unlikely to produce any result possessing recognizable legitimacy.

 

[rexlunae]

I like the democrat rules. Mrs Clinton has gotten skunked in 6 of the last 7 states yet took the delegates in their rigged system.

The last state, Wisconsin, was relatively close, so Bernie got notably more delegates, but not an overwhelming majority. The last few states were not close, and Bernie overwhelmingly got the lion's share of delegates from them, but they are also small states, which means that they don't count a lot toward the total. I'm a Sanders supporter, and that all seems fair to me. Sanders needs to win the big states by a healthy margin to catch up.

Now, if you want to talk about superdelegates, that's where the process is really rigged. But in fairness, if you want an argument in favor of them, just look at the mess the Republicans have made for themselves.

 

[Foxfire]

The last state, Wisconsin, was relatively close, so Bernie got notably more delegates, but not an overwhelming majority. The last few states were not close, and Bernie overwhelmingly got the lion's share of delegates from them, but they are also small states, which means that they don't count a lot toward the total. I'm a Sanders supporter, and that all seems fair to me. Sanders needs to win the big states by a healthy margin to catch up.

Now, if you want to talk about superdelegates, that's where the process is really rigged. But in fairness, if you want an argument in favor of them, just look at the mess the Republicans have made for themselves.

Bear in mind that this isn't the first presidential campaign in which Hellery held the vast majority of super delegates until well into the campaign. :think:

It remains to be seen if she can keep from losing them, this time, even with the media bias that she has enjoyed to date.

 

[Nick M]

Bernie won the big state of Michigan and got less delegates. The DNC system is rigged. Just like their party. Which is why rusha, purex and others don't talk about it.

 

[rexlunae]

Bear in mind that this isn't the first presidential campaign in which Hellery held the vast majority of super delegates until well into the campaign. :think:

It remains to be seen if she can keep from losing them, this time, even with the media bias that she has enjoyed to date.

It certainly will be harder for Sanders to make the case to the superdelegates. Obama was at least a Democrat. Sanders never has been. In a sense, the success of Sanders is an affront to a party establishment that's seen by many as too close to wall Street and big business, and that's largely directed at the superdelegates themselves, not in their rolls as such, but in their main jobs as Congresspeople and governors.

 

[rexlunae]

Bernie won the big state of Michigan and got less delegates. The DNC system is rigged. Just like their party. Which is why rusha, purex and others don't talk about it.

I'm going to wait to see what they actually do. The superdelegates don't actually get committed until they vote in convention. Counting them toward Clinton's lead based on their declared loyalty seems a bit unreasonable. And it's much more likely than not that Clinton wins the pledged delegate race anyway, and then what they do is mostly symbolic. I think that if Democrats want to win, they should nominate Sanders, and if they want to reward a career of fealty to the party, Clinton, but other people feel differently, and they have a say in it too.

 

[whatever67]

I like the democrat rules. Mrs Clinton has gotten skunked in 6 of the last 7 states yet took the delegates in their rigged system.

that D system should be against the law, along with the buying of selling of delegates going on in both parties (money? or things money can buy? There is NO difference)

sickening.. our country has been highjacked by unAmerican forces, it seems

Drump can afford to buy his way to the WH, it appears. Too bad the one who is most "like us" Ted Cruz cannot afford to

But hey, maybe people will see through all this, including the delegates?

 

[whatever67]

Bernie won the big state of Michigan and got less delegates. The DNC system is rigged. Just like their party. Which is why rusha, purex and others don't talk about it.

Hellary is such a big liar, Ds are going to stay home rather than cast a vote 4 her.

Ditto Drump

strange world. Too bad.. the US used to be different. And yet the People.. God bless them! They know.. Their voting patterns show that they know soemhthing is up

Ted Cruz has won last 4 or 5 states

 

[whatever67]

I'm going to wait to see what they actually do. The superdelegates don't actually get committed until they vote in convention. Counting them toward Clinton's lead based on their declared loyalty seems a bit unreasonable. And it's much more likely than not that Clinton wins the pledged delegate race anyway, and then what they do is mostly symbolic. I think that if Democrats want to win, they should nominate Sanders, and if they want to reward a career of fealty to the party, Clinton, but other people feel differently, and they have a say in it too.

Hellary is as corrupt as a person can get, endangered US security (Will she get away w/ it?)

corruption everywhere

Then there is Drump who supported all those corrupt politicians and now wants to pass himself off as a R.

How do you know when they are lying? Their mouths are moving

:shocked:

We need a person w/ integrity in the WH (you'd think that would go without saying?? you'd think it would be a huge DUH, but these days..)

vote for Ted Cruz

 

[whatever67]

The last state, Wisconsin, was relatively close, so Bernie got notably more delegates, but not an overwhelming majority. The last few states were not close, and Bernie overwhelmingly got the lion's share of delegates from them, but they are also small states, which means that they don't count a lot toward the total. I'm a Sanders supporter, and that all seems fair to me. Sanders needs to win the big states by a healthy margin to catch up.

Now, if you want to talk about superdelegates, that's where the process is really rigged. But in fairness, if you want an argument in favor of them, just look at the mess the Republicans have made for themselves.

i dont see any irregularity in the R rules, unless there is a rule that allows someone no one voted for to win. But that said, i would say this: ANYTHING but--the egotistical, liberal-supporting corrupt liar

something needs to be done to stop such people from stealing the WH (just because he manages to con so many people into voting for him)

we are sick of con artists

which is why Cruz has won the last 4 states (the more people know about the con artist---). Utah was almost 70%!!!

People are waking up

Sanders is illogical (as are all socialists who want to tax our employers to death and cause them to ditch the US for some other country)

i think Sanders--doesn't have you-know-what envy, but MONEY envy. He envies the money corporations are making, wants to destroy them. Never mind that everyday Americans need the jobs they provide

dumb!