Delegates....a rigged system?

[kaz]

I listen to him and you listen to what MS-NBC says about him.

You're clueless about what I watch.

Your talking points are a pretty big clue. You're among the most mindless of even leftists with totally kool-aid believing every shallow, hate filled, bigoted Democrat talking point. That points to MS-NBC where the hosts do commercials for the Democrat party

 

[kaz]

I'll never understand the delusional conservative mind. By almost every measure Obama has improved American life from the day he took office.

Stagnant wages and increasing debt in a recovery normally would doom anyone as a one termer, but the gop has alienated a lot of people ... generally on social issues.

What have Republicans done on social issues?

Campaigned on them, then when they win they go back to their #1 priority: greed and holding onto power.

WTF? Do you even know what social issues are? The question is, "What have Republicans done on social issues?"

Holding onto power is something all politicians try to do, it isn't a social issue. And "greed" is an economic issue, do you know what the word means? It means wanting money. You know, like you want money you didn't earn. That's greed. It's not a social issue

Read it again and get back to me. I'm beginning to think it's past your nap time.

Exactly, you mindlessly intone that Republicans are driven by socons, but you can't think of any examples of what they do for socons ...

 

[kaz]

The founding fathers specified how to vote in Federal Elections. They did not specify how private organizations should vote.

Private organizations can't vote, dope.

And corporations aren't people, either.

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[kaz]

And the tax cuts weren't the problem, SPENDING was the problem.

You're saying that tax cuts didn't add massive amounts to the debt?

Tax cuts when they are as high as they are now reduce the deficit, particularly as a percent of GDP since reductions lead to higher GDP and vice versa.

You just can't help yourself from changing the argument when you are losing, can you?

We're talking about the DEBT not the DEFICIT.

Go take that nap!

No, they didn't. Particularly as I said in a real sense as opposed to a nominal one. Tax cuts trigger economic activity that offsets the decreased tax revenue. But only if you believe economists instead of lawyers.

Despite Reagan's tax cuts, tax revenue doubled under his administration

 

[kaz]

And I'm calling you a right winger when you're not one because you keep calling me a right winger when I'm not one. My God, you are S-T-U-P-I-D. That was butt obvious

Of course you're a Right-Winger.

Do you generally support Republican positions or Democratic positions?

Have you ever voted for a Republican?

Have you ever voted for a Democrat?

Are Libertarian positions more aligned with the Right or the Left?

Do you generally support Republican positions or Democratic positions?
- fiscal - Republican - I'm way to the right of them, but you asked which party is closer. They are, barely
- social - Democrat - I'm way to the left of you, but you asked which party is closer. You are, barely
- military - neither - we want to reduce military involvement in the world

Have you ever voted for a Republican?

yes

Have you ever voted for a Democrat?

yes

Are Libertarian positions more aligned with the Right or the Left?

See above where I already answered it

Here you go, simpleton. All this time on political message boards and you don't know what a libertarian even is? What a dumb shit
What is a small government libertarian?

 

[kaz]

Our awful government is the result of that narrow thinking.

Conservatives get elected, work their hardest to destroy government institutions and the public's faith, then run again complaining that government is bad and they're the only ones who can fix it.

Rinse, repeat.

Our government keeps getting bigger and, say what homeboy? How is your response supposed to make sense that the problem is anyone is destroying government institutions? OMG, we can't live without more government, who will take care of us??? So, what institutions are in your mind possibly getting smaller?

Again, you have problems with basic words.

I say strengthen government institutions and make them efficient, and you change it to "make government bigger". #SMH

Efficient? Government?

My God man, you are a complete sheep

There's your Right-Wing brainwashing kicking in again!

You haven't brainwashed shit, you rightie nut jobs are whacked in the head. Go kiss your tea party dipshits on the lips,

 

[kaz]

I'm not clear what you're asking me. Your literal question answer is yes, but point?

I thought you were arguing that if I don't like the private entities RNC and DNC manipulating the process to get their desired result, I can always vote for a third Party. I'm saying that they are all private entities also, are they not?

You're mixing too many issues together and you're not smart enough or open minded enough to waste the time separating them back out

No, you just don't have an answer.

The point I made but you couldn't seem to comprehend is that if they are all private entities you can't escape the arbitrary rule-making. All of them will have their own rules.

I've gotten that point all along. Yes, they each decide how they want to select their own candidate. Then they have to run in a general election to win the office where everyone can vote. Duh. What I don't get is what your point is. Here's how you know that's what I was asking, I keep asking what your point is ...

The point, again, is that these arbitrary rules are designed to squash the will of the voters.

I provided an example, but you ducked from addressing it:

Trump won Louisiana but Cruz got all the delegates.

I ducked nothing, right wing nut. Pat Robertson's not coming back, give it up.

I did point out that Trump has gotten the reverse in other States. He has 37% of the vote and 45% of the delegates. You Republicans have no logical ability at all

 

[cereal_killer]

As long as Parties are able to make up rules each year it's not democratic. Congress should set the rules for both Parties, and should fund the election.

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

 

[kaz]

And even if it did happen, so you have a wall in one spot for 24-48 miles, or you have a thousand mile wall they could cross anywhere permanently ...

This sounds good to you? Really?

I'm for securing the border, but a wall is retarded. Especially after seeing how El Chappo had a tunnel dug, what...2-3 miles long, completely undetected?

My solution to border control is twofold:

#1 - relocate military bases in interior Red states like Idaho, Kansas, Utah to the Texas border and they can patrol the border.

#2 - Pass a law that has steep fines for any company hiring an illegal. Have mandatory minimum prison sentences for the most egregious offenders. (Why haven't Republicans already passed one? The answer is that they want that cheap labor, and all this panic over illegals is purely political, for their racist, dumbass base.)

Your solution is to keep importing voters

How do you get this from my post?

I really have to dumb things down for you. OK, you want an ineffective solution so you can keep getting illegals in because they vote more Democrat. Seriously, you didn't get that?

I don't get how my solutions are ineffective, especially since neither one has been tried yet.

How would the Army patrolling the border be ineffective?

How would slapping devastating fines on companies be ineffective?

If the penalty is great enough, why would any company take a chance on hiring illegals?

Republicans can't think things through. Just because you monitor doesn't help you chase down thousands of people across a thousand miles. I mean duh, wing nut. Buy a clue, rightie.

And while I don't want illegals to be able to get jobs, the ones who want to work aren't the problem. The ones who don't want to work, commit crimes and run drugs are the problem. You're only dealing with the ones who probably would be allowed if the system were designed to ensure we just kept criminals out and made sure people who come can support themselves. Typical right winger, solving the wrong problem

 

[kaz]

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

 

[HUGGY]

True, and sadly he'd still be an improvement over the last eight years.

I'll never understand the delusional conservative mind. By almost every measure Obama has improved American life from the day he took office.

It's not that hard to fathom the christian fundamentalists that have taken over the GOP. Every thing about them is based on a lie no mater how hard they continue to sell it. They claim ownership of American morality as if they invented it and own the patent. Growing up believing in total nonsense has prepared the neo cons for going with "the group" on all issues and beliefs, including that Obama is the worst American president in history. They have always rejected facts. When faced with facts they come back with their "faith" as the supposed equal theory to everything. They do not need nor accept any information that crosses what they take on faith. Practically ALL of their "information" is religion based or religists generated. They are the lowest and poorest informed group of people in American history. It has been a sad several decades for what was once a proud and strong political party. People like Dwight Eisenhower and Barry Goldwater were well informed and based in reality.

Only a fool can deny the progress towards solvency of our economy. The only fly in the ointment that stands out remains the bubble that Wall street is continuing to build. Obama has done little to nothing in reigning in this dangerous development. In all fairness the republicans in the position of power would do nothing to help him addressing Wall street's and the bank's influence in congress.

What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?

"What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?"

I'm sorry. I keep saying you are constantly mis reading my posts so I had to read this one again because I don't want to accuse you of being stupid without evidence. I didn't find a single word or group of words within the reply that states "social issues the republicans have passed". You are close though as they have ATTEMPTED to pass numerous pieces of legislation with versions of their moral agenda embedded within. That is one of their favorite tricks. They pretend to be addressing a valid need and almost without fail poison the bill with a stupid religist amendment that side rails the legislation. If you do not know what I am referring to you are as dense as you are repetitive.

OK then, smart ass. What social legislation have they "attempted" to pass.

And I'm repetitive because you are evading the question

That's not how they do it "smart ass". They put together a piece of what appears legitimate legislation then use the amendment process to sneak in christian agenda based provisions that have no way of being accepted by non religist driven legislators or in most cases the president. Then they howl like banshees how Obama rejects the sensible legislation.

An example would be something like an aid bill designed to fund Ebola eradication in Africa with an amendment that denies any birth control measures.

OR a bill that funds farmers for whatever and has an added amendment that demands Clinton turn over her e-mails. That would be less religist but still driven by the same group. There is no law that demands that amendments have anything to do with the original intent of the legislation.

The dems do the same thing but they specialize in adding amendments that offer pork to their special interests.

 

[kaz]

I'll never understand the delusional conservative mind. By almost every measure Obama has improved American life from the day he took office.

It's not that hard to fathom the christian fundamentalists that have taken over the GOP. Every thing about them is based on a lie no mater how hard they continue to sell it. They claim ownership of American morality as if they invented it and own the patent. Growing up believing in total nonsense has prepared the neo cons for going with "the group" on all issues and beliefs, including that Obama is the worst American president in history. They have always rejected facts. When faced with facts they come back with their "faith" as the supposed equal theory to everything. They do not need nor accept any information that crosses what they take on faith. Practically ALL of their "information" is religion based or religists generated. They are the lowest and poorest informed group of people in American history. It has been a sad several decades for what was once a proud and strong political party. People like Dwight Eisenhower and Barry Goldwater were well informed and based in reality.

Only a fool can deny the progress towards solvency of our economy. The only fly in the ointment that stands out remains the bubble that Wall street is continuing to build. Obama has done little to nothing in reigning in this dangerous development. In all fairness the republicans in the position of power would do nothing to help him addressing Wall street's and the bank's influence in congress.

What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?

"What are you talking about? What social issues have Republicans passed?"

I'm sorry. I keep saying you are constantly mis reading my posts so I had to read this one again because I don't want to accuse you of being stupid without evidence. I didn't find a single word or group of words within the reply that states "social issues the republicans have passed". You are close though as they have ATTEMPTED to pass numerous pieces of legislation with versions of their moral agenda embedded within. That is one of their favorite tricks. They pretend to be addressing a valid need and almost without fail poison the bill with a stupid religist amendment that side rails the legislation. If you do not know what I am referring to you are as dense as you are repetitive.

OK then, smart ass. What social legislation have they "attempted" to pass.

And I'm repetitive because you are evading the question

That's not how they do it "smart ass". They put together a piece of what appears legitimate legislation then use the amendment process to sneak in christian agenda based provisions that have no way of being accepted by non religist driven legislators or in most cases the president. Then they howl like banshees how Obama rejects the sensible legislation.

An example would be something like an aid bill designed to fund Ebola eradication in Africa with an amendment that denies any birth control measures.

OR a bill that funds farmers for whatever and has an added amendment that demands Clinton turn over her e-mails. That would be less religist but still driven by the same group. There is no law that demands that amendments have anything to do with the original intent of the legislation.

The dems do the same thing but they specialize in adding amendments that offer pork to their special interests.

I didn't ask for hypotheticals, I know how DC operates. I asked what Republicans ARE doing for the Christian right since you say the Christian right dominates them. Not what they could do

 

[Eaglewings]

I would say they have more than a "right" to, but a responsibility to do so.

Funny thing is, Trump himself mentioned 'responsible' leaders

The whole Trump thing is the closest we'll see to a real populist movement in the US, thankfully.

It's the only advantage our demented two-party system has over a parliament.

Trump's following being a cult of personality, it is a hybrid populist thing. Of course he stepped in front of a few issues, but his style and cause has been himself

Almost every populist movement in history has coalesced alongside a cult of personality for it's leaders.

Let's not forget the importance of stupid people in the Trump movement........also an important factor.

So you are saying that the problem Is the Trump supporters not the polictical corruption ? Your a idiot.

.

 

[cereal_killer]

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

 

[kaz]

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

 

[jillian]

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

that analogy is good as far as it goes except for one thing....

trump hasn't brought in 6 people to the original 5. he has about 40% of the vote and 60% want him to go away.

the extremists should start their own party.

 

[jillian]

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

your last paragraph is the problem with republicans now. it's false....and it's been said for the past 36 years or so because ronald reagan wanted to be "states' rights" and get the votes of george wallace voters. try building infrastructure without government.

government does scientific research better.

government does not for profit education better

government does social security just fine

etc.

what you truly get when you undermine government.... is donald trump.

 

[kaz]

You want a say in the republican party? Become a republican and get active. Other wise stop whining like a ***** that the republicans wont let you run their party.

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

I think a better solution is to join / start a party that follows your view. If you started a club and had five members. Then six people come in and outvote you and change the purpose of your club, is that fair to you? In Cryin Donald's case, he's getting a lot of Democrat voters who have zero intention of voting for him in the election. Why wouldn't the party want a say in who their candidate is going to be?

The Democrats and the super delegates thing are even worse. Whether you like the process or not, Cryin Donald is leading with 37% of the vote, barely over a third. And he's in a fight with Cruz. Makes perfect sense.

On the Democrat side, the voting is neck and neck and trending heavily toward the Bern and yet he still has no chance to win

That's not a solution. That only allows the corruption to continue. The system needs to be fixed to directly reflect the will of the American people. Every American (registered voter) should be allowed to vote and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. The Party can and will cast their votes as well, but they must not and should not ever thwart the will of the American people.

If you're fine with a Party having total control of who gets selected then fine, but I'm not, and I'm fairly certain that a majority of Americans don't like it either. I'm attacking the system. Forget Trump and Sanders. There will be other "elections" aka selections and it needs to be revamped to reflect the will of the American people.

I'm fine with private organizations setting their own rules. I'm not fine with what's coming out of the end of the pipe, which is why in the last six elections I voted Republican once and Democrat zero. So I've voted for Perot, Browne, Browne, Badarnak and even Nader because I wasn't happy. But your choices are to convince Republicans to change or go where you feel they're more to your liking.

There is no problem so big and complicated that government can't make it worse. Government controlling the parties would be a nightmare. You think they're unresponsive to the people now. I know you didn't say that's what you're advocating, I'm just saying that's why your choices are to convince Republicans (not going to happen) or just go elsewhere On the going elsewhere, the Republicans really are no better than the Democrats in the end. It really doesn't matter

your last paragraph is the problem with republicans now. it's false....and it's been said for the past 36 years or so because ronald reagan wanted to be "states' rights" and get the votes of george wallace voters. try building infrastructure without government.

government does scientific research better.

government does not for profit education better

government does social security just fine

etc.

what you truly get when you undermine government.... is donald trump.

government does scientific research better. - Government has developed so little of the technology driving us, this is ridiculous

government does not for profit education better - Yeah, the most expensive schools in the west with the worst results. I want more of that, baby! Not

government does social security just fine - A trust fund with no money that's growing ever more crippling on our children. Yeah, that's swell.

Three of the biggest wastes of our economic assets, that's what you named

 

[Pete7469]

All this time on political message boards and you don't know what a libertarian even is? What a dumb shit
What is a small government libertarian?

Liberals do not "know" anything. They haven't the cognitive capacity to know things. They believe in things, most of it fantasy.

I'm not totally on board with libertarians, I'm certainly more into maintaining our military dominance of the world but regardless of all the other issues the most important thing is getting the economy back on track.

Nothing else matters if we go bankrupt. The only one who will reduce government and slash the budget is Cruz. Everyone else, including Dump, is talking about "universal health care" and any rational person knows that alone will destroy us.

 

[Pete7469]

Are you unable to comprehend a simple concept? I want every American (registered voter) to vote and have their vote counted. I give ZERO ***** about the party's.

The party's have no business thwarting the will of the American people. Period..........."by" "for" and "of". You're perfectly happy getting bent over and having the party insert their 12" dick into your ass, most Americans aren't.

The "will of the people" gave us the moonbat messiah. I shouldn't have to wash the taste of dick out of my mouth just because we live in a nation of drones that keep jumping on popculture bandwagons and cults of personaility.