Queen Prawn Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 BTW this type of thing is exactly the reason that we should have a national primary day. My mom, Brian and I were saying the same thing the other day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 BTW this type of thing is exactly the reason that we should have a national primary day. Why should two states with about 1% of the national population between them, who are totally unrepresentative of the US racially, play such a huge roll in picking our Presidential canditiates? It is garbage that my primary vote means nothing. If we had, had a national primary, howard dean would be our candidate right now. That is why we have a primary system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 If we had, had a national primary, howard dean would be our candidate right now. That is why we have a primary system So is it right that two lilly white states decided that John Kerry should be it? Is it right that a tiny minority of Americans decided that Howard Dean shouldn't be President, which gave the perception that he was done? Is it right that when the majority of Americans go to the polls they have no choice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted March 3, 2004 Author Share Posted March 3, 2004 Is there any point to voting in the Illinois Primary? candidates for senator, etc? don't ever not vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 don't ever not vote! Hence, the second part of my post! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 So is it right that two lilly white states decided that John Kerry should be it? Is it right that a tiny minority of Americans decided that Howard Dean shouldn't be President, which gave the perception that he was done? Is it right that when the majority of Americans go to the polls they have no choice? No i don't think that Iowa and NH should decide things for the rest of us. Perhaps, insted of changing the primary system, we should change the media coverage of the primaries. Make CNN not over analyze the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 No i don't think that Iowa and NH should decide things for the rest of us. Perhaps, insted of changing the primary system, we should change the media coverage of the primaries. Make CNN not over analyze the results. Good luck on that one. Media coverage is only going to get more intense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted March 3, 2004 Author Share Posted March 3, 2004 a national primary day would suck because only the biggest campaign$$$$ could finance a national effort there is a sorting out process that is done the current way and that allows less funded candidates like an Edwards to make their pitch and hang in in the 30 states have now had primaries or caucuses, it is a tad unfair to say that 1% of the voters have made a choice - or even narrowed the field - plenty of candidates have skipped or fared poorly in Iowa (distant 3rd) and NH (distant 2nd) and still went on be president (case in point, Clinton). Iowa only killed Gephardt who mad ehis stand there - Dean had plenty of time to bounce back, so did Clark, so did the rest - the current way is far from ideal but it is far far better than a national primary in my opinion another way to "vote" is by giving money to the candidates one hopes will make it - I gave money to Dean, Clark, Edwards, and Kerry another way to "vote" is to volunteer in the states where the primaries and caucuses are I know what some are saying because in 2000 the Michigan caucus meant nothing - Bradley withdrew a few days before - but in 1992, 1988, 1984, and 1980 we had an impact - Michiugan moved their caucus date up for 2004 consider this: if you ant to move your presidential primary up, yiou either move the entire primary or hold a special presidential primary and that is taxpayer funded for a party function so in Michigan we hold our caucus and pay for it ourselves - and then we get complaints because it is not a primary - thee is no perfect system - I wish there were Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 So is it right that two lilly white states decided that John Kerry should be it? Is it right that a tiny minority of Americans decided that Howard Dean shouldn't be President, which gave the perception that he was done? Is it right that when the majority of Americans go to the polls they have no choice? Each state decides individually when to hold their primary. The states that wait untill later are rewarded by the party with more delagates at the Convention. The state party has to weigh the cost / benefit. Be important during the primary season vs. being more important at the National Convention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Didn't think so. But that never stopped me from voting anyway lol. Dean for President! (Hey, he one a state! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 So is it right that two lilly white states decided that John Kerry should be it? Is it right that a tiny minority of Americans decided that Howard Dean shouldn't be President, which gave the perception that he was done? Is it right that when the majority of Americans go to the polls they have no choice? I totally agree. I am nto saying in this case that one canidate is better than another, but what happens is that once one gets rolling it is hard to stop and you really have no other choice than to vote for him because people start flying out of the race. I, for one, would like to see something like what is done during the elections. Have everyone vote on the same day. With a primary, you are in a sense voting for the president of your party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted March 3, 2004 Author Share Posted March 3, 2004 Each state decides individually when to hold their primary. The states that wait untill later are rewarded by the party with more delagates at the Convention. The state party has to weigh the cost / benefit. Be important during the primary season vs. being more important at the National Convention. that is not a Dem practice - a republican practice maybe? each state has the delegates it has but party rules control who goes first - which is Iowa with caucus and NH with primary - 4 years from now it will be your party having the madcap primary season and us being all smooth with no oppostion to President Kerry in the primaries - have fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 4 years from now it will be your party having the madcap primary season and us being all smooth with no oppostion to President Kerry in the primaries - have fun! No. Both parties will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 So you don't think too much of Karmejo (I probably botched the spelling)? Camejo, IIRC, ran for governor of CA in the recall. I like his policies somewhat but American voters hate intellectual candidates. I mean, look at the debates...we get Bush saying "You're talking about Social Security like it's some sort of federal program." His idiocy is not a one time thing. And Gore wasn't much better (another corporate shill) but he was the more intellectual of the two. I mean, after the debates they asked voters in polls and they said "Well Gore looked smarter but Bush appeared more likeable." We were just somewhat lucky that the last "likeable" President played down his Rhodes scholar status. When professional wrestling is one of the top shows on TV, it's a crisis for democracy. People don't want to debate issues and the such, it's become ads like showing Max Cleland (Vietnam vet who lost 3 limbs in country days after being awarded the Silver Star) standing side by side with Osama bin Laden because Cleland is a Democrat and questioning the intentions of the "war on terror". Hence, news shows don't have actual debates on issues, just talking moron heads bashing each other over the skull with prepared rhetoric. Rarely, you can get a Michael Medved or a Justin Raimondo or a Robert McChesney or a Joe Conason who cuts away a bit of the rhetoric and they explain exactly "Here's why Candidate A sucks/is good at this issue." But let's face it, we live in an argument culture that likes to created a dichotomy between differing views so there is no escape from the labels. I mean, I'm a left libertarian (government out of personal freedoms but patrol corporations since laissez faire capitalism in practice has been shown to create some shady companies like Enron, Union Carbide etc. flaunting their nose at the law...so protections against corporate greed, corruption and environmental standards) but there's no point for that in the debate spectrum. If you disagree with Bush, you get labeled a Democrat (something I'm not) and if you agree with Bush, a lot of Dems and others put that in for agreeing with him on everything which isn't true for the most part. It's sort of why I like the Greens slogan "Neither right nor left...but out in front." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted March 3, 2004 Author Share Posted March 3, 2004 No. Both parties will be. President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry John Adams & John Quincy Adams equal G HW Bush and G W Bush get used to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry President Kerry John Adams & John Quincy Adams equal G HW Bush and G W Bush get used to it! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! John Kerry = Michael Dukakis...Get used to THAT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Nope, none. Aren't there positions in the state assembly or any propositions up on the ballot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Ya Apu, he was the green party rep in the governor recall process. He came off as pretty good on camera. Didn't attack Arnold, although I completely disagree with his policies, but thats why I'm not a member of the green party. Seems like a sharp guy. A ton of people follow him at my school, which is where he announced that he was going to run for president. Thank goodness I read my school paper, although the main thing I look for are when the free movie screenings are as well as when good free/cheap concerts are going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.