- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 120,954
- Reaction score
- 28,531
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
One of the good things that is coming out of both the Trump and Sanders campaigns is that people are beginning to see that some of the state primary delegate selections rules are not exactly what some people would call as fair. With the proliferation of primaries over the last twenty years - today a vast majority of convention delegates come from the primary process unlike decades ago when only a minority were.
I would suggest that primary voters expect that their vote determines who from their state goes to the convention and who they vote for. The reality is that does not always turn out that way - and that is by intentional design where party power brokers still want a large voice in the process.
But political parties are not part of the Constitution and generally exist outside of legal regulation and control on purpose. But at the same time, states give over ballot access to the parties convention nominees and there is a close relationship between them.
And we hear Trump complaints about Colorado and a few theory states where the Cruz people appear to be picking his pocket of delegates and Sanders complains about the super delegates which resonates with some voters. Even Trump says Sanders has a legitimate beef.
So my question is this: given the role of the primaries now in the selection of our next president, is it not time for certain legal reforms to make sure the primary and nominating process is what most people would call fair and honest? or - have we not gone beyond the stage in our history where we simply leave the parties alone to do their thing as private entities outside the law despite their amazing impact on government itself and who will eventually hold office?
I would suggest that primary voters expect that their vote determines who from their state goes to the convention and who they vote for. The reality is that does not always turn out that way - and that is by intentional design where party power brokers still want a large voice in the process.
But political parties are not part of the Constitution and generally exist outside of legal regulation and control on purpose. But at the same time, states give over ballot access to the parties convention nominees and there is a close relationship between them.
And we hear Trump complaints about Colorado and a few theory states where the Cruz people appear to be picking his pocket of delegates and Sanders complains about the super delegates which resonates with some voters. Even Trump says Sanders has a legitimate beef.
So my question is this: given the role of the primaries now in the selection of our next president, is it not time for certain legal reforms to make sure the primary and nominating process is what most people would call fair and honest? or - have we not gone beyond the stage in our history where we simply leave the parties alone to do their thing as private entities outside the law despite their amazing impact on government itself and who will eventually hold office?