There’s just nothing unusual or interesting about Dems changing party nomination processes. It’s every cycle since McGovern-Fraser and they always do it in response to internal constituencies and perceived problems. National rules are complicated. State parties have to file plans, get approval.
Sounds like a corrupt party that chooses its winners instead of letting their voters choose. Them doing it for forever isnt a win lol
Um, no. Party nominating processes changed for 1972 do nearly all nominating delegates were picked by voters and since then every nominee was the choice of the majority of primary VOTERS. Clinton beat Sanders by 12 points among voters nationally. That’s a landslide.
That is, since the McGovern-Fraser reforms and processes since.
I have a question. If we're trying get rid of the electoral college which is being abused in winner-take-all schemes, and the "delegate" system is an antiquated piece of history like the college is, why not just make it easier with a popular vote? In both cases? (talking ideals, not practicality)
Democrats don’t use winner take all in any presidential delegate selection. Republicans do in some states.
I know, they cheat. I'm just wondering your thoughts on going toward a popular vote style system rather than a system of sending people on horseback to a delegation to vote. Broadly.
Duse, winner take all for primaries/caucuses helps whoever is best known at the start of the process and hurts insurgent candidates. Why would you think it’s better?
And why would you think winner take all is “cheating” compared to the rules Dems use that award delegates from primaries/caucuses proportionally as long as the candidate got over the threshold?
Republicans’ use of winner take all highly advantaged Trump and hurt his challengers. Did you know that?
I don't think it's better. I'm asking why we wouldn't want to use a popular vote system rather than a delegate or electoral college system. I DISLIKE winner takes all systems, it's undemocratic and it's cheating.
How would your popular vote system work exactly, and why do you think winner take all is cheating?
Winner takes all is cheating, to me, because it robs the minority vote of its representation. Because all electoral college votes are tallied at the end and that total is used to determine the winner. Popular vote system would just eliminate redundancy and increase trust and transparency.
So you don’t want any party nominating conventions?
And what does the electoral college have to do with presidential nominations? (Nothing.)
It doesn't. I compared the two because they're both antiquated in a similar way, in a time where it may have been necessary because we don't have near instant communications, hence my reference to horseback.
I don't think it's that simple but I do think it raises questions, hence they improved by making changes. I just hope there isn't a repeat. They aren't legally required to uphold their own rules because the partisan apparatus are private corps in both RNC and DNC. Is our pressure enough? We'll see.
I agree, what is relevant is what is changed and why.