Is party endorsement a good thing?
Feb 26, 2014 07:42:50 #
We have two good guys running for state senate in my district. One got the party endorsement on the third b****t of the committee peoples endorsement convention. Now the party expects the one who got 61 v**es out of 173 to drop out of the race to create "party unity". We have 250,000 v**ers to decide the primary race but the 173 committee people who v**ed want to make the primary a "no contest" e******n. Sometimes I think it is far better to have an open primary. I live in PA and each party has to v**e on their own party's b****t and the winner runs in the general e******n in November. What are your thoughts on endorsement versus open primary?
Feb 26, 2014 08:04:51 #
We have two very corrupt parties in our political system here in America. While I would contend the dumacrats are MORE corrupt, willing to do any thing to win, the republicans can be as corrupt once they are in DC. Not sure they are as corrupt on a local level but in DC they both have gone to the dark side.
Feb 26, 2014 09:00:39 #
abob wrote:
We have two good guys running for state senate in ... (show quote)
Open primary, by all means, then a runoff between the two top v**e getters. "Party endorsement" gave us McCain and Romney, and one more term of Obama. "Party endorsement" is how the establishment "good ol' boys and girls keep their stranglehold on the political process, and why this mess we are in gets no better.
Feb 26, 2014 09:01:03 #
banjojack wrote:
Open primary, by all means, then a runoff between the two top v**e getters. "Party endorsement" gave us McCain and Romney, and one more term of Obama. "Party endorsement" is how the establishment "good ol' boys and girls" keep their stranglehold on the political process, and why this mess we are in gets no better.
Feb 26, 2014 09:10:10 #
Feb 26, 2014 09:10:45 #
abob wrote:
We have two good guys running for state senate in ... (show quote)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Welcome, abob!
I may be in the minority here, but I believe in open b****ts. I am even in favor of not labeling the party of the candidates. I say everyone should know about the candidates, v**e principle, not political party. I believe every b****t should have a slot for *None of the above*. I don't believe the Party should try to weed out anyone. There have been numerous times I didn't even get a chance to v**e for my favorite because he was "eliminated" before I could v**e for him, and I despise that. Every candidate should get a chance in every state, then if necessary, we should have run-off v****g. Basically, as things now stand, a newcomer doesn't have a chance in hell of accomplishing anything. The old dogs WILL control. We may have a democratic republic, but we don't have any fairness in our government.
Feb 26, 2014 09:47:25 #
Tasine wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ br Welcome, abob! br... (show quote)
I think Ron and Rand Paul have the idea. I am a registered Republican, but I v**e Libertarian frequently. Join your local party, because like it or not, the National Circus will not change until change at the local and state level occurs. Rome was not built in a day. Trying to start at the top is like trimming back Kudzu. You have to get the roots.
Feb 26, 2014 10:02:26 #
Good point ! I would take it several steps forward. If it can be legally be done I would eliminate political party.s all together thus forcing candidates to run on there own two leg's, but mostly on their own merits providing they have any. The result would be that with no party affiliations the v**er will have to think for himself, If that is possible. Another step would be to do as The Indian's did, and that is let only the elders run for office, with only minimal pay and no perks. A good candidate would be some one who has no get rich ambitions, who already has succeeded in life be it big or small, and only looks forward to serving the public and not himself and his cohorts, bearing in mind that this person has life time experiences. Look at this clown we now have in office. his only experience is a community organizer ( street hustler) Without some radical changes on whom and how we put people in office, we will be doomed.
Feb 26, 2014 10:14:04 #
banjojack wrote:
Open primary, by all means, then a runoff between the two top v**e getters. "Party endorsement" gave us McCain and Romney, and one more term of Obama. "Party endorsement" is how the establishment "good ol' boys and girls keep their stranglehold on the political process, and why this mess we are in gets no better.
The party and the country endorsed Obama.
Feb 26, 2014 10:22:49 #
3jack wrote:
The party and the country endorsed Obama.
Wanna bet?????? The party did, but the country simply got snookered........ There is a difference and Obama along with his backing machine s***e the e******n using v***r f***d...... I think parties should be banned. They do more damage then anything else for our e******ns. Even the Republican party is corrupt and they pick the one they want, not the one the people want. A good many people were going for Ron Paul, but the party did everything they could to k**l his chances of getting anywhere.........
Feb 26, 2014 10:32:30 #
MrEd wrote:
Wanna bet?????? The party did, but the country si... (show quote)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Feb 26, 2014 10:35:43 #
3jack wrote:
The party and the country endorsed Obama.
Given a choice between diet democrat and full flavor.
Feb 26, 2014 10:42:36 #
pappadeux wrote:
Good point ! I would take it several steps forward... (show quote)
Initially, you had to be a property owner to v**e. You had to be a taxpayer. There were more qualifications than simply being able to fog a mirror. You had to have a dog in the fight. I personally think it ridiculous that as a veteran, a taxpayer for nearly 40 years, a homeowner, and a former business owner, my v**e counts exactly the same as an 18 year old who has only his or her cluelessness for a guide, and who has made absolutely no contribution worth noting to the society they v**e for. That is like giving a non-stockholder an equal v**e in corporate matters. Is that v**er discrimination? Damn right. Let the people who worked for it, who contributed to it decide.
Feb 26, 2014 10:45:08 #
MrEd wrote:
Wanna bet?????? The party did, but the country si... (show quote)
Snookered, v***r f***d, wh**ever you think it was makes no difference at this point. Obama was the winner and things are looking bad for the party of stupid again in 2016.
Feb 26, 2014 10:48:10 #
banjojack wrote:
Given a choice between diet democrat and full flavor.
Diet Democrat defeated full flavored fool.....hands down.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.