We Still Have a Month Until the Next Primary Vote!

[tekisui]

This is going to be one long month. The votes are at least the People setting the story and momentum.

Another month of the media and surrogates is going to be nauseating.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

1. Ain't That A Bitch?

Tooooooo long.

[tekisui]

3. I shudder to think where it's heading.....

What's next? I don't want to know.

:scared:

[slinkerwink]

7. yeah.

[Bensthename]

2. Obama has a lot of money to though at the media for the next month too. Just sayin.

[tekisui]

4. Yeah, he has the money. Hillary is in debt.

That makes for an uncomfortable arrangement.

[LWolf]

5. If you want the votes to be the people setting the story,

you need to tweak a few things.

First of all, outlaw polls.

Secondly, make sure ALL the candidates are on ALL the ballots.

Finally, count all the votes on the same day.

The votes next month do not tell the story about how many voters wanted neither Obama nor Clinton, and never got to vote their conscience. The votes next month reflect an entrenched determination to narrow choice.

[tekisui]

8. All true points.

I much prefer the votes of People setting the narrative, than the media and surrogates.

I like ALL the candidates on ALL the ballots. But, how can you count ALL the votes on the same day. A National Primary would have given this to Clinton in a cake walk.

[LWolf]

9. Here's how:

Do mail in ballots for primaries. My state, Oregon, does ALL voting by mail. Your ballot is mailed to you several weeks before election day. You fill it out at your leisure, and mail it in time to get it in by the deadline, or you drop it off at several ballot drop-offs all the way up to the day that polls would be open in other states.

If we did a mail-in ballot for all primaries, and then had one national COUNTING day to begin counting all ballots, then you could still spread the primaries out to allow candidates to campaign in every state.

If you outlawed polls, then people would still be voting their first choice; polls would not be narrowing their choice by convincing them that their first choice wouldn't win.

Frankly, I'd like to see caucuses go away, too. Let those people whose candidate didn't get enough people in the first round in their neighborhood add their votes to the whole state. Let their votes count for their first choice, not their second, third, or fourth.

Every single vote would carry equal weight. Early primaries wouldn't carry more weight than any late primaries. The outcome wouldn't be manipulated by polls. THAT would be democratic.

[tekisui]

11. I fear the one with the big money and big name recognition

would be unfairly advantaged. How could a Kucinich or Edwards compete in a National Campaign?

[LWolf]

12. The same way they do already.

If there were no polls to manipulate voters and donors, it would help.

The best help, of course, would be to add the following elements:

100% public financing, with no outside donations of any kind, and no campaigning by any outside groups.

Some version of a fairness doctrine, with guaranteed equal, neutral mass media time.

IRV, encouraging people to vote their first choice.

[tekisui]

13. Sounds good to me.

The Public Financing is key.

And, IRV would be a HUGE improvement.

And no Superdelegates!

[LWolf]

14. No super delegates, for sure! n/t

[slinkerwink]

6. I'm tired of this already. I want a nominee now.

[ConcernedCanuk]

10. Wow - long time no see, guess I ain't been hanging around the same forums

.
.
.

I remember



and