Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

For the ones who have been calling on Hillary to quit

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 01:59 PM
Original message
For the ones who have been calling on Hillary to quit
I wonder whether you have already voted.

I think that this is great that, for the first time, many voter still have a choice this late at the game.

For many their chosen candidate left too early, but at least they have a choice, and this is something that all of us should celebrate. And perhaps this will be the push that we need to give many voters a choice starting in 2012.

For 2012, regardless of who wins, let us change the system so that more than 2% of the voters, in unrepresentative states have a chance to select our nominee.

And while we are there, let's change the way we fund the campaigns. Every time that I hear about the million of dollars pouring into the campaigns I am thinking that, first, perhaps time is not bad after all when people can afford to send money (our gas bill for the past three months has been $180, $190 and $200 - 1800 sq ft house) and, two, how much we can do in this country with all this money.

Last, a Republican voter in Texas told CNN that he voted in the Democratic party for Hillary because he considers her more beatable by McCain. No doubt, there have been similar votes for Obama. Do we really want Republicans to determine who is our nominee? Let's close the caucuses and primaries to outside agitators. And while there, let's get rid of caucuses.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. good post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Know what's hilarious?
Edited on Fri Feb-29-08 02:00 PM by Occam Bandage
You question big-money financing of campaigns, and then propose that we have a nationwide primary, which would make it completely and entirely about who could buy bigger advertising packages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. No, I do not suggest a national primary
not that I am surprised that people here "shoot first" and ask questions later.

I suggest either rotating regional primaries that include IA and NH, or primaries that start with a group of small states - total of 8 electoral votes - and gradually move to larger ones.

Either way IA and NH should get out as the king makers. Iowa will have to find other ways to stuff its coffers beyond $60 million every four years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. It's a zero-sum game. The
Edited on Fri Feb-29-08 02:12 PM by Occam Bandage
broader you make it, the more big money gets to influence it. The narrower you make it, the more you get the problem you were complaining about, in which a few people in unrepresentative states get to choose the nominee and everyone else is effectively disenfranchised.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. why do IA and NH have special significance in the primaries?
has it always been this way, and for what reason?

been meaning to ask this for a while.
would appreciate some info.

thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I think that it started in 1972 after that horrific 1968 convention in Chicago
at least, for Iowa.

It seems that New Hampshire was always first, this was why LBJ, in 1968, withdrew from the race after barely winning over Eugene McCarthy. I think that something like that also happened to Truman.

I think that there were many threads about this in January..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Anti-Bush Donating Member (251 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. And for every one who votes for disingenuous reason....
I bet there are 5 who vote for us because the republican candidates just suck.

Let every vote count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. You mean, every vote should have equal weight
That we get a discrepancy between the winner of the popular votes and the number of delegates - we did not like it on a national level in 2000, why do we encourage it in our primaries and caucuses?

That black and hispanic districts in Texas have different values, that the Texans can actually vote twice - but only if they do not have a nigh shift, do not have to take care of a sick child - is a corruption of the one person one vote rule.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debatepro Donating Member (683 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
4. Caucasus are an important demonstration...
of your ground game... I want our nominee to always be someone who can organize and win Caucasus.


With that being said... i have already early voted... but I plan to Caucas on 3/4...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-29-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. The irony is your vote still doesn't count
The math is what it is, and Hillary can not come back. She needs to quit so we can focus all our attention on the republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC