Page 96 of 472

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 9:32 pm
by Chris_H_2
WHY CAN'T EVERY STATE VOTE AT THE SAME TIME?!?!?!? THAT WAY RESULTS WOULDN'T INFLUENCE HOW VOTERS VOTE IN OTHER PRIMARIES!!!! IT'S SO STOOOOPED!!!

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 9:43 pm
by Norah
Chris_H_2 wrote:WHY CAN'T EVERY STATE VOTE AT THE SAME TIME?!?!?!? THAT WAY RESULTS WOULDN'T INFLUENCE HOW VOTERS VOTE IN OTHER PRIMARIES!!!! IT'S SO STOOOOPED!!!
Because staggering them allows for regionally focused campaigning.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 9:45 pm
by Birds in Hell
Monkey_Driven wrote:The primary system is kind of dumb.
As an outsider, the whole process seems bizarre.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 9:48 pm
by tommymtcom
Birds in Hell wrote:
Monkey_Driven wrote:The primary system is kind of dumb.
As an outsider, the whole process seems bizarre.
They make the whole process confusing and opaque so that people will hopefully not notice they are being screwed.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 9:57 pm
by BurtReynolds
Of course its dumb.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 9:59 pm
by Simple Torture
I think it might not be so dumb if we kept the primary system but switched to a popular-vote-only general election. Maybe? I gotta think about it more.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 10:24 pm
by nyquillyn
I like the idea of a more compact primary season with regions that would rotate on who would hold their primaries first. (It would be kinda cool to see a state like California actually matter).

Then popular vote in the general.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 10:35 pm
by Simple Torture
Lots has been written this year about how Iowa and New Hampshire don't reflect the electorate at large. NH is 92.3% white and Iowa is 88.7% (US as a whole: 72.4%). Race isn't the only thing to consider--you could think about income, education, and so on--but it'd be much more interesting to get a cross-section early on. Virginia, for example, is a much more interesting state than fucking New Hampshire.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Wed March 02, 2016 10:36 pm
by Norah
turned2black wrote:I like the idea of a more compact primary season with regions that would rotate on who would hold their primaries first. (It would be kinda cool to see a state like California actually matter).

Then popular vote in the general.
I can see something like this being a good system.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 12:21 am
by Self

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 12:47 am
by stip
cutuphalfdead wrote:
turned2black wrote:I like the idea of a more compact primary season with regions that would rotate on who would hold their primaries first. (It would be kinda cool to see a state like California actually matter).

Then popular vote in the general.
I can see something like this being a good system.

That, or ensuring that no one region dominates a grouping, but that makes campaigning more difficult

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:23 am
by Norah
stip wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:
turned2black wrote:I like the idea of a more compact primary season with regions that would rotate on who would hold their primaries first. (It would be kinda cool to see a state like California actually matter).

Then popular vote in the general.
I can see something like this being a good system.

That, or ensuring that no one region dominates a grouping, but that makes campaigning more difficult
The problem is the states can hold their primaries whenever they want, and you have a state like New Hampshire that has a state law which says they must hold their primary first. So if another state tries to hold their primary earlier than New Hampshire traditionally does, the Secretary of State of New Hampshire is obligated by law to move their primary up to still be first. It got a little contentious in 2012, which is why New Hampshire voted in early January instead of February in that cycle.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:26 am
by stip
any reform would be a logistical and political nightmare for sure

NY should pass a state law saying it needs the first primary in the nation to fuck with NH

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:28 am
by BurtReynolds
unmute it

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:53 am
by Simple Torture
BurtReynolds wrote:unmute it
https://vine.co/v/igH3wW1Khe9
Classic b!

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:54 am
by nyquillyn
This weekend will be interesting. Bernie could (and probably will) win 3 of the 4 contests, but actually lose the delegate count.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:55 am
by BurtReynolds
Simple Torture wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:unmute it
https://vine.co/v/igH3wW1Khe9
Classic b!
I will commit suicide over this disgrace.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:56 am
by Simple Torture
BurtReynolds wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:unmute it
https://vine.co/v/igH3wW1Khe9
Classic b!
I will commit suicide over this disgrace.
That sounds reasonable.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:56 am
by B
BurtReynolds wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:unmute it
https://vine.co/v/igH3wW1Khe9
Classic b!
I will commit suicide over this disgrace.
Classic geg!

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Thu March 03, 2016 1:57 am
by BurtReynolds
Simple Torture wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:unmute it
https://vine.co/v/igH3wW1Khe9
Classic b!
I will commit suicide over this disgrace.
That sounds reasonable.
Image