Posted by dahsdebater on 4/27/2016 8:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by DougOut on 4/27/2016 6:36:00 PM (view original):
Trump should get the needed delegates now. It's pretty much over in spite of what Cruz did today. Everybody I talk to has the same idea. BEAT HILLARY! They don't care. We would vote for ANYBODY over hillary. She should have a restraining order on her. No closer than 500 yards to the White House.

And it's going to be wonderful to see all the Republicans come together to defeat the new american Nazi party.

This actually explains a lot. Your worldview is shaped tremendously by the fact that you apparently surround yourself only with entirely like-minded individuals. That and listening to Rush explain how you're so convinced you're part of the silent majority.

But seriously, try to be remotely aware of the rest of the world. As of right now, all early polling has Hillary utterly destroying Trump. I'd say there are plenty of people in the country thinking of things other than beating Hillary.

I truly believe you, and some others, greatly underestimate the vast number of people who are so entirely disgusted with our current political system that they would readily vote for anyone, and I mean anyone, who is an "outsider". Trump is not a great candidate, but he's not just anyone either. Combined with the fact Hillary embodies everything that is wrong with our current system (except the woman card), she makes voting for Trump even easier. We'll see, but a vast, vast majority of the middle-class environment I associate and deal with is ready for change, any change.

Posted by DougOut on 4/27/2016 9:00:00 PM (view original):
Like beating Trump?

Early polling?

Utterly destroying?

This actually explains a lot.

Alright, I messed up. Ignored Occam's Razor. I tried to attribute more complex reasons for your seemingly-absurd worldview. I tried to implicate your influences.

The simple and obvious answer really was best here, and your garbled nonsensical response - which I'm sure you think actually conveys some scathing commentary on my post - brings it back into stark relief.

It's not your influences. You're just dumb as stone.

Hooray for PA
33 unbound Republican Delegates have pledged their unwavering votes for Trump, since he was the candidate their constituents voted for.
Now THAT'S how Democracy is supposed to work.

Posted by all3 on 4/28/2016 11:47:00 AM (view original):
Hooray for PA
33 unbound Republican Delegates have pledged their unwavering votes for Trump, since he was the candidate their constituents voted for.
Now THAT'S how Democracy is supposed to work.

We live in a republic.

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/28/2016 11:47:00 AM (view original):
Hooray for PA
33 unbound Republican Delegates have pledged their unwavering votes for Trump, since he was the candidate their constituents voted for.
Now THAT'S how Democracy is supposed to work.

We live in a republic.

We wish. Parties, and therefore politicians, don't give a d@mn what the majority of the people want.

Correct. The nomination of a party's candidate isn't really a majority rule situation. The parties (rightly) control who their nominees are.

RIP Sports Authority. Can't afford the $15 minimum wage and keep prices down.

Yay liberals!!!!

Posted by raucous on 4/28/2016 1:42:00 PM (view original):
RIP Sports Authority. Can't afford the $15 minimum wage and keep prices down.

Yay liberals!!!!

Sure, it has everything to do with a minimum wage that hasn't gone into effect yet and nothing to do with online shopping.

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Correct. The nomination of a party's candidate isn't really a majority rule situation. The parties (rightly) control who their nominees are.

Roughly 43% of Americans of voting age identify as independents.

Time for all states to have open primaries, or at least semi-open primaries, where unaffiliated voters can have the opportunity to vote on either the Democratic or Republican ballots.

Registered Democrats or Republicans would still need to vote in their own party.

Plus, the entire delegate system is antiquated and should be abolished. Go with popular vote across the board.

Same with the Electoral College for the general election. Probably served its purpose well when it was first conceived, but is also antiquated and should be abolished.

Roughly 63% of Americans of voting age don't even know what "independents" means.

Posted by tecwrg on 4/28/2016 1:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Correct. The nomination of a party's candidate isn't really a majority rule situation. The parties (rightly) control who their nominees are.

Roughly 43% of Americans of voting age identify as independents.

Time for all states to have open primaries, or at least semi-open primaries, where unaffiliated voters can have the opportunity to vote on either the Democratic or Republican ballots.

Registered Democrats or Republicans would still need to vote in their own party.

Plus, the entire delegate system is antiquated and should be abolished. Go with popular vote across the board.

Same with the Electoral College for the general election. Probably served its purpose well when it was first conceived, but is also antiquated and should be abolished.

Why would the parties want to give up control of the nomination process?

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 2:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 4/28/2016 1:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Correct. The nomination of a party's candidate isn't really a majority rule situation. The parties (rightly) control who their nominees are.

Roughly 43% of Americans of voting age identify as independents.

Time for all states to have open primaries, or at least semi-open primaries, where unaffiliated voters can have the opportunity to vote on either the Democratic or Republican ballots.

Registered Democrats or Republicans would still need to vote in their own party.

Plus, the entire delegate system is antiquated and should be abolished. Go with popular vote across the board.

Same with the Electoral College for the general election. Probably served its purpose well when it was first conceived, but is also antiquated and should be abolished.

Why would the parties want to give up control of the nomination process?

Roughly 43% of the vote in the general election comes from unaffiliated voters. That could swing a party from nominating a loser to nominating a winner.

All the polls say that John Kasich is the only hope the Republicans have to win the White House this November. For the sake of argument, let's say that it's the independent vote that goes primarily for Kasich over the other two clowns in the GOP, and also over the criminal and the socialist from the Democrats. Under the current system, the registered GOP voters are so FUBARed that they are likely nominating an unelectable candidate in Donald Trump, or maybe Ted Cruz. Under an open, or semi-open primary system, they're also getting the pulse of the independent vote as part of their nomination process.

Would that be a bad thing?

Is there a reason everyone can't/shouldn't just register as an independent?

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/28/2016 2:33:00 PM (view original):
Is there a reason everyone can't/shouldn't just register as an independent?

America would probably be a lot better off if everybody did. The party system is broken to the point where it is nearly completely dysfunctional.

Posted by tecwrg on 4/28/2016 2:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 2:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 4/28/2016 1:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/28/2016 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Correct. The nomination of a party's candidate isn't really a majority rule situation. The parties (rightly) control who their nominees are.

Roughly 43% of Americans of voting age identify as independents.

Time for all states to have open primaries, or at least semi-open primaries, where unaffiliated voters can have the opportunity to vote on either the Democratic or Republican ballots.

Registered Democrats or Republicans would still need to vote in their own party.

Plus, the entire delegate system is antiquated and should be abolished. Go with popular vote across the board.

Same with the Electoral College for the general election. Probably served its purpose well when it was first conceived, but is also antiquated and should be abolished.

Why would the parties want to give up control of the nomination process?

Roughly 43% of the vote in the general election comes from unaffiliated voters. That could swing a party from nominating a loser to nominating a winner.

All the polls say that John Kasich is the only hope the Republicans have to win the White House this November. For the sake of argument, let's say that it's the independent vote that goes primarily for Kasich over the other two clowns in the GOP, and also over the criminal and the socialist from the Democrats. Under the current system, the registered GOP voters are so FUBARed that they are likely nominating an unelectable candidate in Donald Trump, or maybe Ted Cruz. Under an open, or semi-open primary system, they're also getting the pulse of the independent vote as part of their nomination process.

Would that be a bad thing?

It's been a while, but, from what I remember from grad school, there isn't evidence that open primaries reduce party polarization.

It may seem like all those independents would make a big difference but they don't. Part of the reason is that a lot of people that identify as independent are either uniformed/unmotivated or they are just as partisan as party members.

My uncle is an independent but he listens to Rush Limbaugh everyday and yells at the TV when Obama is on. I won't be surprised if he votes for Trump.