[US Election 2016] Democratic Primary Megathread II

[John King]

Heh, very true. And if that were to happen, alongside a hypothetical brokered convention on the Republican side. What's next?

For once, I have no idea whatsoever.

Honestly, if the result of a superdelegate-won Dem primary and GOP brokered convention was still a Clinton v. Trump race, I'd almost want Trump to win to add insult to injury on the already-evidently-broken system, so that when he fucks up big we can look back on the whole process and seriously say, as a nation, "maybe some things need fixing."

Hypothetically-speaking, just imagine that if that were to happen and Trump were to actually "fix" the system. Perhaps a rise of a legitimate third party? Maybe.

But logically-speaking, I don't know what would happen. Other than total chaos. But if the "establishment" plays their cards right; then all of this can be avoided and we can look towards a likely Clinton-Trump match up. In which I'd say it's 50/50 for both.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Honestly, if the result of a superdelegate-won Dem primary and GOP brokered convention was still a Clinton v. Trump race, I'd almost want Trump to win to add insult to injury on the already-evidently-broken system, so that when he fucks up big we can look back on the whole process and seriously say, as a nation, "maybe some things need fixing."

Fixing the presidential election system requires amending the Constitution and that requires a very large movement throughout the nation so that Congress or a super-majority of the states call for it. The party primary systems can only be changed from within the parties. I don't believe Congress or the state legislatures can do more than set guidelines and dates.

That's a bit of a misnomer - there's actually four processes for amending the constitution.



Amendments can also be passed via conventions of the people, not just by congress and the state legislators. That said, Proposal by Congress and ratification by state legislature has been used 26 times, Proposal by Congress and ratification by State Convention has been used once - to repeal prohibition, and neither of the two possible processes using a national convention have ever been used. However, with enough outcry and an absolutely unbending congress, it could occur. Of course, it then requires the demanding of the stage legislatures to call said convention, but those *are* generally more bendable to local will.

Also, the party primaries can and have been limited and defined by law - White Primaries have been ruled on by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, for example. This is in recognition of the fact that the primary has a 50/50ish shot of picking the president, so proper representation in the primary is necessary to make your vote mean anything nationally.

> Ruled legal in Grovey v. Townsend (1935)
> Overturned in Smith v. Allwright (1944)

[Farnhamia]

Fixing the presidential election system requires amending the Constitution and that requires a very large movement throughout the nation so that Congress or a super-majority of the states call for it. The party primary systems can only be changed from within the parties. I don't believe Congress or the state legislatures can do more than set guidelines and dates.

That's a bit of a misnomer - there's actually four processes for amending the constitution.

Amendments can also be passed via conventions of the people, not just by congress and the state legislators. That said, Proposal by Congress and ratification by state legislature has been used 26 times, Proposal by Congress and ratification by State Convention has been used once - to repeal prohibition, and neither of the two possible processes using a national convention have ever been used. However, with enough outcry and an absolutely unbending congress, it could occur. Of course, it then requires the demanding of the stage legislatures to call said convention, but those *are* generally more bendable to local will.

Okay, you got me on the paths to an amendment but notice that the smallest number in all of those is 2/3. I'm less sanguine about the malleability of the state legislatures than you are. It would probably take longer than the one term Mr. Trump would serve to do it and the enthusiasm would drop off quickly.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

That's a bit of a misnomer - there's actually four processes for amending the constitution.

(Image)

Amendments can also be passed via conventions of the people, not just by congress and the state legislators. That said, Proposal by Congress and ratification by state legislature has been used 26 times, Proposal by Congress and ratification by State Convention has been used once - to repeal prohibition, and neither of the two possible processes using a national convention have ever been used. However, with enough outcry and an absolutely unbending congress, it could occur. Of course, it then requires the demanding of the stage legislatures to call said convention, but those *are* generally more bendable to local will.

Okay, you got me on the paths to an amendment but notice that the smallest number in all of those is 2/3. I'm less sanguine about the malleability of the state legislatures than you are. It would probably take longer than the one term Mr. Trump would serve to do it and the enthusiasm would drop off quickly.

You're probably right, but there's a shot Especially if it's directly after such a twisted and controversial path to getting both candidates.

That said, the Dem. Primary thread is probably not the best place for this discussion :S

[Farnhamia]

Okay, you got me on the paths to an amendment but notice that the smallest number in all of those is 2/3. I'm less sanguine about the malleability of the state legislatures than you are. It would probably take longer than the one term Mr. Trump would serve to do it and the enthusiasm would drop off quickly.

You're probably right, but there's a shot

That said, the Dem. Primary thread is probably not the best place for this discussion :S

True. *summons Guards* Take us away ... the Spa is nice for a bit of relaxation late at night.

[Camicon]

That's a bit of a misnomer - there's actually four processes for amending the constitution.

(Image)

Amendments can also be passed via conventions of the people, not just by congress and the state legislators. That said, Proposal by Congress and ratification by state legislature has been used 26 times, Proposal by Congress and ratification by State Convention has been used once - to repeal prohibition, and neither of the two possible processes using a national convention have ever been used. However, with enough outcry and an absolutely unbending congress, it could occur. Of course, it then requires the demanding of the stage legislatures to call said convention, but those *are* generally more bendable to local will.

Okay, you got me on the paths to an amendment but notice that the smallest number in all of those is 2/3. I'm less sanguine about the malleability of the state legislatures than you are. It would probably take longer than the one term Mr. Trump would serve to do it and the enthusiasm would drop off quickly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_PAC

Wolf PAC has passed resolutions in either the Upper or Lower House of eleven states, and both in four of those eleven. It may not be fast but they've got a foothold in 1/5 of America's state legislatures, and that counts for something.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Okay, you got me on the paths to an amendment but notice that the smallest number in all of those is 2/3. I'm less sanguine about the malleability of the state legislatures than you are. It would probably take longer than the one term Mr. Trump would serve to do it and the enthusiasm would drop off quickly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_PAC

Wolf PAC has passed resolutions in either the Upper or Lower House of eleven states, and both in four of those eleven. It may not be fast but they've got a foothold in 1/5 of America's state legislatures, and that counts for something.

Is there enough interest in this for me to start a campaign reform thread?

[Farnhamia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_PAC

Wolf PAC has passed resolutions in either the Upper or Lower House of eleven states, and both in four of those eleven. It may not be fast but they've got a foothold in 1/5 of America's state legislatures, and that counts for something.

Is there enough interest in this for me to start a campaign reform thread?

If you can work in the Bundys ...

[USS Monitor]

Or they vote for her because they simply favor Clinton's policies over Sanders'.

PUMA's are annoying whether they're for Clinton or Sanders or..really anyone else.

Though it is amusing how nigh identical the ranting is.

"It's the corrupt party establishment oligarchs and their rich media allies trying to silence the true voice of the people who support <Insert your candidate here> in favor of their pet bought and paid for candidate <insert candidate you don't like here>!!!"

Rabid Hillary supporters were saying the exact same things about Obama in 2008.The party and the media were trampling over the ordinary people because they had decided that Obama was their candidate and nobody and nothing, least of all the prole voters, was going to get in their way!

Except Hillary had more establishment backing than Obama when the 2008 primaries started, so with her it's demonstrably wrong.

[USS Monitor]

Biased coverage.

If biased coverage is pushing voters in a certain direction then unbiased, less biased or differently biased coverage would be pushing them in other directions. If I accept your premise (and I recall that I did do just that, at least in the broad strokes a few posts back) then I am also accepting the premise that the influence this biased coverage produces has some sort of deleterious effect on the quality of these voters' decision making.

Insofar as biased coverage gives a broader understanding of one candidate's position as opposed to the other's. Shit, how many people knew jack shit about O'Malley because of the lack of coverage on his campaign?

I'd raise my hand if I had hands. I still don't know that much about him.

[USS Monitor]

Honestly, if the result of a superdelegate-won Dem primary and GOP brokered convention was still a Clinton v. Trump race, I'd almost want Trump to win to add insult to injury on the already-evidently-broken system, so that when he fucks up big we can look back on the whole process and seriously say, as a nation, "maybe some things need fixing."

Fixing the presidential election system requires amending the Constitution and that requires a very large movement throughout the nation so that Congress or a super-majority of the states call for it. The party primary systems can only be changed from within the parties. I don't believe Congress or the state legislatures can do more than set guidelines and dates.

If we had a parliamentary system we wouldn't need to fix the party primaries.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Fixing the presidential election system requires amending the Constitution and that requires a very large movement throughout the nation so that Congress or a super-majority of the states call for it. The party primary systems can only be changed from within the parties. I don't believe Congress or the state legislatures can do more than set guidelines and dates.

If we had a parliamentary system we wouldn't need to fix the party primaries.

You're in luck, I've made a thread now

[Corrian]

I think this is the main time I've seen The Late Show with Stephen Colbert poke fun at Hillary Clinton. He doesn't seem to make as many jokes about her as the others (Including Bernie), though the Republicans do pretty much give one giant field that makes it pretty easy to make fun of.

[New Chalcedon]

Heh, very true. And if that were to happen, alongside a hypothetical brokered convention on the Republican side. What's next?

For once, I have no idea whatsoever.

Honestly, if the result of a superdelegate-won Dem primary and GOP brokered convention was still a Clinton v. Trump race, I'd almost want Trump to win to add insult to injury on the already-evidently-broken system, so that when he fucks up big we can look back on the whole process and seriously say, as a nation, "maybe some things need fixing."

Mmmm.....the problem is, his "fucking up big" may well involve a nuclear war near the end. Hillary Clinton is a corrupt, vicious war-hawk with no discernible principles, but she's not batshit crazy. As Edwin Edwards put it, "Vote for the lizard, not the wizard!"

[Jordkloden]

Hey, can anybody give me a clear definition of push-polling?

[Galactic Russian Empire]

Hey, can anybody give me a clear definition of push-polling?

Asking questions that try to paint one candidate in a particularly bad light, under the disguise of regular polling. For example:

"Sanders supports XYZ which will most likely kill puppies, would you support such a measure?"

[Jordkloden]

Hey, can anybody give me a clear definition of push-polling?

Asking questions that try to paint one candidate in a particularly bad light, under the disguise of regular polling. For example:

"Sanders supports XYZ which will most likely kill puppies, would you support such a measure?"

Ohhhhh......yeah, Hillary's done that.

[Conserative Morality]

Why do people think they can get away with this in the digital age?

[Eol Sha]

Why do people think they can get away with this in the digital age?

Huh. How interesting.

[Jordkloden]

Why do people think they can get away with this in the digital age?

Dicks.

[Ashlak]

Why do people think they can get away with this in the digital age?

And they wonder why people hate establishment dems.

[Ashmoria]

I think this is the main time I've seen The Late Show with Stephen Colbert poke fun at Hillary Clinton. He doesn't seem to make as many jokes about her as the others (Including Bernie), though the Republicans do pretty much give one giant field that makes it pretty easy to make fun of.

comedians make fun of candidates when they do stupid things. Hillary seldom does stupid things. the republicans on the other hand do so many stupid things that its hard to keep track of it all.

[USS Monitor]

I think this is the main time I've seen The Late Show with Stephen Colbert poke fun at Hillary Clinton. He doesn't seem to make as many jokes about her as the others (Including Bernie), though the Republicans do pretty much give one giant field that makes it pretty easy to make fun of.

He makes some good jokes about her here too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6RVKCqGhCM

Yes, he's also going after Bernie, but come on -- some guy called him "Bernie Sandwiches" and he really does have bad hair. You can't expect a comedian not to joke about that stuff. Someone really should have explained to Bernie Sanders before he started his campaign that a lot of people watch election coverage on TV, and how you look can affect people's impressions of you when they see you on TV. I know Bernie's old enough to remember before everyone had TVs when I lot of people would listen to the debates on the radio and you could get away with terrible hair. I remember it too and I sometimes miss those days, but that was a long time ago. You'd think he would have noticed by now that working class people have access to TVs and/or YouTube.

[Corrian]

Yes, he's also going after Bernie, but come on -- some guy called him "Bernie Sandwiches" and he really does have bad hair. You can't expect a comedian not to joke about that stuff. Someone really should have explained to Bernie Sanders before he started his campaign that a lot of people watch election coverage on TV, and how you look can affect people's impressions of you when they see you on TV. I know Bernie's old enough to remember before everyone had TVs when I lot of people would listen to the debates on the radio and you could get away with terrible hair. I remember it too and I sometimes miss those days, but that was a long time ago. You'd think he would have noticed by now that working class people have access to TVs and/or YouTube.

Hey, I'm not against his jokes, I just like to see him make more jokes towards Hillary

[Conserative Morality]

Yes, he's also going after Bernie, but come on -- some guy called him "Bernie Sandwiches" and he really does have bad hair. You can't expect a comedian not to joke about that stuff. Someone really should have explained to Bernie Sanders before he started his campaign that a lot of people watch election coverage on TV, and how you look can affect people's impressions of you when they see you on TV. I know Bernie's old enough to remember before everyone had TVs when I lot of people would listen to the debates on the radio and you could get away with terrible hair. I remember it too and I sometimes miss those days, but that was a long time ago. You'd think he would have noticed by now that working class people have access to TVs and/or YouTube.

I miss Bernie's crazy old man hair.