• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney isn't winning.

Thanks for confirming my initial impression of your level of knowledge. Come back when you've learned a little about the process.

I understand the process. It being a caucus system has exactly nothing to do with meeting the candidates. Absolutely nothing. The reality is that you want people excluded and want the radical rightwing to control the Iowa Republican party - as it does. There is no defense to denying military personnel the opportunity to vote. Sure, in some ego-thing what matters to you is candidate's smiling at you and you want your vote to count more by excluding others from voting at all. What do you care about people risking getting blow to pieces defending your right to do so? Its all only about you from what I gather by your messages.

The caucus system sucks and particularly when it does not allow absentee ballot voting for good cause shown. It is that simple. Maybe I should start a poll on the topic of excluding active military from being allowed to cast absentee ballots.

Some other states use caucuses after the primary day voting ends to select delegates to party conventions - but not to candidates' nominating conventions.
 
I understand the process. It being a caucus system has exactly nothing to do with meeting the candidates. Absolutely nothing. The reality is that you want people excluded and want the radical rightwing to control the Iowa Republican party - as it does. There is no defense to denying military personnel the opportunity to vote. Sure, in some ego-thing what matters to you is candidate's smiling at you and you want your vote to count more by excluding others from voting at all. What do you care about people risking getting blow to pieces defending your right to do so? Its all only about you from what I gather by your messages.

The caucus system sucks and particularly when it does not allow absentee ballot voting for good cause shown. It is that simple. Maybe I should start a poll on the topic of excluding active military from being allowed to cast absentee ballots.

Some other states use caucuses after the primary day voting ends to select delegates to party conventions - but not to candidates' nominating conventions.

Your post is nothing but a pile of assumptions.........

1. No where did I claim that the caucus system had anything to do with meeting the candidates.

2. I don't want anyone excluded and I most certainly don't want the "radical rightwing" to control the party.

3. No one has excluded the military as I've shown many times. It's a pretty simple concept that you have to be present to participate in the caucus, which excludes a lot of people. I was working out of town when I lived in Iowa and couldn't participate.

4. No one cares about your opinion of the caucus system.

Feel free to start a poll, but be prepared for the laughter.
 
At the present time Romney out of all the contenders may well not be winning, but neither is he whining.

Being a longtime Texan Republican, Perry can kiss my vote goodbye.
 
Your post is nothing but a pile of assumptions.........

1. No where did I claim that the caucus system had anything to do with meeting the candidates.

2. I don't want anyone excluded and I most certainly don't want the "radical rightwing" to control the party.

3. No one has excluded the military as I've shown many times. It's a pretty simple concept that you have to be present to participate in the caucus, which excludes a lot of people. I was working out of town when I lived in Iowa and couldn't participate.

4. No one cares about your opinion of the caucus system.

Feel free to start a poll, but be prepared for the laughter.

1. Essentially all active military are excluded.
2. No justification is given for a caucus election system.
3. In fact statistically the result was that evangelical Christians controlled the caucuses.
4. That you don't care being a political irrelevancy if you couldn't vote in your state is your concern. Millions of people don't vote like you didn't.
5. No one "cares" about anyone else's opinions on forums.
 
Or maybe I can only speak for myself. For myself, when the Republican candidates - all - declared themselves at the most extreme ends of anti-abortion and anti-gays - they lost my vote in November.

Ya think?????
 
You know what they say. It's not over til the fat lady sings. ........

Bertha! ! Would you shut up. It's just an expression.
 
Back
Top Bottom