Colorado's Voters Should Revolt!

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

primaries are run by the parties. they have little to do with voting rights.

now if the supreme court appointed your president....

oh wait......

Back to that again? Do you need my factcheck links to prove you are wrong as usual?

If primaries are run by the party and not the voters, then WTF is the sense of having voters participate in the first place? Tell people there is no voting so we don't waste our time and let them pick who they want.

By allowing people of the party to vote, they give us the impression that what we desire really matters. And in my opinion, primaries are the most important vote since it tells the parties which direction the constituents wish to go.

On the Republican side (so far) we are telling our party we are sick of professional politicians and want a change. On the Democrat side, they wish to have a potential criminal or Socialist represent their points of view. Your current President was endorsed by the US Communist Party Both elections, and Sanders spent his honeymoon in the USSR. That's where your people want your party to go.

See post no. 17.

As to:

"If primaries are run by the party and not the voters, then WTF is the sense of having voters participate in the first place?"

The primaries in a given state are the creation of the state parties, where members of both parties occupy the state legislature and write the elections laws.

The primaries are conducted in accordance with a given state’s elections laws, supervised by state elections officials, whose results are certified by the state.

But there is nothing compelling either party to abide by those election results.

For example, Trump ‘won’ Florida, and most if not all of its delegates.

But come the convention those delegates are at liberty to vote for whomever they wish.

Voters participate to express a preference, with the understanding their vote is not binding on the GOP.

A good example of this would be the Democratic Wisconsin primary, where Clinton garnered 38 of the state’s 86 delegates, although Sanders ‘won’ the state.’

These aren’t ‘elections,’ they’re primaries, and it’s about winning delegates, not states.

 

[Wildman]

4. Will they fight for the vote or just roll over and smoke a joint?

there is your answer, the Commierado voters are too fucking stoned to give a shit!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

primaries are run by the parties. they have little to do with voting rights.

now if the supreme court appointed your president....

oh wait......

Correct.

Voters have a right to participate in their state’s primary (if one exists), but the parties as private entities are not ‘required’ to apportion delegates in accordance to the election results come the convention.

The voters never had the ‘authority’ to determine a given party’s nominee to begin with, and should a party nominate a candidate who did not receive a majority of primary votes, no voting rights are ‘violated.’

 

[ScienceRocks]

Ted cruz doesn't give a shit about the vote of the voters! He is for the GOPE!!!!!!!

 

[oreo]

.
I knew these marijuana laws were just a conspiracy to pacify the masses.[/QUOT

Ha.Ha. the voters in this state voted to legalize marijuana so no government conspiracy going on, and yes Coloradoans are pissed. They've had this caucus system screwed up for a couple of Presidential cycles here.

Last year we were supposed to go with a Presidential primary, they screwed that up, then they canceled the Republican caucus, and this is how this came about.

I imagine there's more than a few Republicans heads that are going to roll over this one.

 

[oreo]

Yes Colorado cancelled the Repu

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

primaries are run by the parties. they have little to do with voting rights.

now if the supreme court appointed your president....

oh wait......

Correct.

Voters have a right to participate in their state’s primary (if one exists), but the parties as private entities are not ‘required’ to apportion delegates in accordance to the election results come the convention.

The voters never had the ‘authority’ to determine a given party’s nominee to begin with, and should a party nominate a candidate who did not receive a majority of primary votes, no voting rights are ‘violated.’

Colorado cancelled the Republican Presidential caucus months ago.
Colorado Republicans cancel presidential vote at 2016 caucus

 

[jillian]

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

primaries are run by the parties. they have little to do with voting rights.

now if the supreme court appointed your president....

oh wait......

Correct.

Voters have a right to participate in their state’s primary (if one exists), but the parties as private entities are not ‘required’ to apportion delegates in accordance to the election results come the convention.

The voters never had the ‘authority’ to determine a given party’s nominee to begin with, and should a party nominate a candidate who did not receive a majority of primary votes, no voting rights are ‘violated.’

one can certainly argue the utility of that in this day and age, but the reality is that the candidate carries the banner of the party...

and we don't even vote directly for the president given the EC...where someone's vote in Utah carries more weight than my vote in NY.... which is absurd.

so the donald can whine until his head explode, he's seeking the republican nomination, and is going to represent that party if he's picked. and he's already got over 40% of delegates when he has a lower percentage of actual votes, so he's overrepresented anyway.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. IF the people of the Great State of Colorado do not revolt, then their delegates need to be snuffed out and not counted AT ALL!
2. If they do not allow its people a voice, then they need to be smothered all together.
3. Taken out to the Colorado river and flung into it like a sack of dead kittens.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Papageorgio]

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

primaries are run by the parties. they have little to do with voting rights.

now if the supreme court appointed your president....

oh wait......

Still spouting the same lie over a decade later. Lol!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

primaries are run by the parties. they have little to do with voting rights.

now if the supreme court appointed your president....

oh wait......

Back to that again? Do you need my factcheck links to prove you are wrong as usual?

If primaries are run by the party and not the voters, then WTF is the sense of having voters participate in the first place? Tell people there is no voting so we don't waste our time and let them pick who they want.

By allowing people of the party to vote, they give us the impression that what we desire really matters. And in my opinion, primaries are the most important vote since it tells the parties which direction the constituents wish to go.

On the Republican side (so far) we are telling our party we are sick of professional politicians and want a change. On the Democrat side, they wish to have a potential criminal or Socialist represent their points of view. Your current President was endorsed by the US Communist Party Both elections, and Sanders spent his honeymoon in the USSR. That's where your people want your party to go.

See post no. 17.

As to:

"If primaries are run by the party and not the voters, then WTF is the sense of having voters participate in the first place?"

The primaries in a given state are the creation of the state parties, where members of both parties occupy the state legislature and write the elections laws.

The primaries are conducted in accordance with a given state’s elections laws, supervised by state elections officials, whose results are certified by the state.

But there is nothing compelling either party to abide by those election results.

For example, Trump ‘won’ Florida, and most if not all of its delegates.

But come the convention those delegates are at liberty to vote for whomever they wish.

Voters participate to express a preference, with the understanding their vote is not binding on the GOP.

A good example of this would be the Democratic Wisconsin primary, where Clinton garnered 38 of the state’s 86 delegates, although Sanders ‘won’ the state.’

These aren’t ‘elections,’ they’re primaries, and it’s about winning delegates, not states.

I understand all that, but the point is if the delegates are not going to match the will of the voter, then it doesn't make any sense to have a vote since the constituents really don't have a say-so. If 90% wanted Trump, and they decide to give Cruz all the delegates anyway, then what's the point?

Colorado told their voters what was up before all this came about, so I'm not using them for my argument. And if I lived in that state, I would be switching my party affiliation to Independent right now, but that's up to the voters there.

 

[Mac1958]

I just heard Mark Levin say that Trump sounds like a -- I'm not making this up -- Marxist for complaining about what happened in Colorado.

wtf.

Off the rails. Seriously off the freakin' rails.
.

 

[g5000]

The people of Colorado voted on whether or not to revolt and the results are in: Colorado will adopt a kitten.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This is a hoax

 

[Moonglow]

.
How do people high on marijuana revolt? Eat Ruffles potato chips instead of Doritos?

Kettle chips, they defy the norm...

 

[g5000]

Ted Cruz followed the rules. He didn't write them. It isn't his fault Trump and the rubes did not read the fine print.

You want a guy who knows the art of the deal, right?

 

[g5000]

This is a hoax

Yep.

 

[Avatar4321]

It was never up to the voters to decide to begin with. Why should they ‘revolt.’

Why? Because it should be up to the voters.

No, the GOP is a private organization, at liberty to decide its nominee as it sees fit, in any manner it sees fit, where neither government nor the voters can dictate to a private organization as to its membership, or in the case of a political party, who its nominee might be.

Remember that the primary process is relatively new – for decades the GOP didn’t start the nomination process until the convention itself, with the attending delegates alone voting on who the nominee might be.

Who will be a governor of a given state or who will occupy a given seat in the US Senate is for the voters to decide, determining who will serve in elected office and act in the official capacity of government.

But nominating a presidential candidate is the sole responsibility of the private political party, not subject to the will of the voters or government.

So once again, I ask: Why have voters of the party participate in the first place? If our view is not respected or considered, then why waste our time????

It is. For the first ballot. If the people don't have a final choice then the candidates get to work for delegates at the convention

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

People finally see the GOP for the corrupt fascists that they are .

The Democrats aren't Democratic, even if Bernie Sanders would have won all Primaries, the Party Establishment would take the nomination off him with the Super Delegates who are already pledged to Hillary.

This isn't Democratic now is it?

 

[Avatar4321]

Sorry bout that,


1. IF the people of the Great State of Colorado do not revolt, then their delegates need to be snuffed out and not counted AT ALL!
2. If they do not allow its people a voice, then they need to be smothered all together.
3. Taken out to the Colorado river and flung into it like a sack of dead kittens.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

The people did vote, in their caucuses

 

[jillian]

Sorry bout that,


1. IF the people of the Great State of Colorado do not revolt, then their delegates need to be snuffed out and not counted AT ALL!
2. If they do not allow its people a voice, then they need to be smothered all together.
3. Taken out to the Colorado river and flung into it like a sack of dead kittens.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

shush