The Presidential Primary Scam - Why the game is rigged,

[zippy890]

and why true democracy is only a secondary factor in the nation's rush to nominate the next president.'

Michael Scherer/Salon

~snip~

Oct. 8, 2007 | WASHINGTON -- It's far worse than you think -- worse than hanging chads, faulty Diebold machines, and billionaires who bankroll last-minute attack ads. The American system for nominating a presidential candidate has about as much in common with actual democracy as Donald Duck has with a lake mallard. It's not just that this year's primaries have been further front-loaded, or that the early primary states aren't representative of the nation at large. There is only passing fairness. There is only the semblance of order. There is nothing like equal representation under the law.

The whole stinking process was designed by dead men in smoky parlors and refined by faceless bureaucrats in hotel conference rooms. It is a nasty brew born of those caldrons of self-interest known as political parties. At every stage, advantage is parceled out like so much magic potion. "The national interest is not considered in any form," says University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato. "Everything is left up to an ad hoc decision. It's chaotic."

...

And it gets worse. This election cycle, a top Democratic candidate shaking someone's hand in Miami before the end of January is breaking the rules, unless that someone is handing the candidate a check at the same time. To put it another way, Democrats' communicating with voters has been barred in Florida, but taking money from voters is OK. To put it a third way, the system is not only irrational but offensive to the nation's most basic values. "The only way that you can hear a candidate campaign is if you are willing to pay a campaign contribution," explains Steven Geller, Florida's exasperated state Senate Democratic leader. "It is astounding."

~snip~

more at:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/10/08/presidential_primary/

We need a major overhaul of the election system folks, but don't count on it changing anytime soon.

[zippy890]

1. "FACT: When you vote in a presidential primary or caucus,

you are usually not voting for a specific candidate, but for another person, called a delegate, who you hope will later support your candidate at the Republican and Democratic National Conventions. You can only hope, because many states do not bind delegates to follow voter intent, especially in the case of a contested convention. If no single candidate gets a majority of the delegates on the first vote, then the horse-trading can begin. After the second ballot, most delegates are free to nominate Jared, that guy from the Subway commercials, if they so choose. The last contested convention occurred in 1984, when Democratic candidates Gary Hart and Jesse Jackson initially refused to yield to Walter Mondale."

~~~snip~~~

But I didn't VOTE for Jared from the Subway commercials

[zippy890]

2. "FACT: The national parties do not apportion delegates to states

simply on the basis of either general or partisan population. (The Democratic rules are explained here, the Republican rules here.) For example, Tennessee has about the same number of residents as Washington state. But Tennessee will get 55 delegates at the Republican National Convention, while Washington is stuck with 40. The math involved in deciding delegate distribution is extraordinarily complex, involving the Electoral College, the strength of the local state party and other factors. Part of the formula used by Democrats reads like this: AF = ½ × ( ( SDV ÷ TDV ) + ( SEV ÷ 538 ) ). The bottom line is that no one will ever be able to say that any two delegates are created equal."

~~~snip~~

whut? uh I thought we were like, voting for a candiate in the primaries.
delegate algebra, it looks like.

edited -typo

[FormerDittoHead]

3. The whole presidential thing is screwed up. We should have runoffs.

This whole system sucks as it was designed before the telegraph, let alone the TV and the internet.

[zippy890]

4. it strikes me reading this article that HERE is the reason

for such voter apathy in this country. People know the system is rigged and outdated, they sense it without knowing all the particular details.

what do you mean by 'runoffs'?

I'm interested in any way to improve/change this system.

[FormerDittoHead]

5. Aka Two round system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-round_system

Thom Hartmann suggests that the reason that we don't have in America is because (pause) IT HADN'T BEEN INVENTED YET.

It WOULD be interesting to see in these current primaries.

For example, if say in round one, Clinton and Edwards were the top two, the others eliminated.

Then, in the 2nd ballot, it would be Clinton versus Edwards (or Obama) with none of the others...

This, combined with a complete elimination of these antiquated delegate voting systems, would bring more power to the people, and I think they could see their votes making a difference...