I don't understand what these primaries are about but oh, the horror of Trump being president again. However, in the background I think government departments work away behind the scenes to ameliorate the excesses of your possible President, the excesses that have gotten through not withstanding.
Andrew, here's what Wikipedia has to say about primaries:
"Each of the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and territories of the United States holds either primary elections or caucuses to help nominate individual candidates for president of the United States. This process is designed to choose the candidates that will represent their political parties in the general election.
"The United States Constitution has never specified this process; political parties have developed their own procedures over time. Some states hold only primary elections, some hold only caucuses, and others use a combination of both. These primaries and caucuses are staggered, generally beginning sometime in January or February, and ending about mid-June before the general election in November. State and local governments run the primary elections, while caucuses are private events that are directly run by the political parties themselves. A state's primary election or caucus is usually an indirect election: instead of voters directly selecting a particular person running for president, they determine the number of delegates each party's national convention will receive from their respective state. These delegates then in turn select their party's presidential nominee. The first state in the United States to hold its presidential primary was North Dakota in 1912, following on Oregon's successful implementation of its system in 1910."
Andrew, a common criticism of the caucus-and-primary system:
"Because they are the states that traditionally hold their respective contests first, the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary usually attract the most media attention; however, critics, such as Mississippi secretary of state Eric Clark and Tennessee senator William Brock, point out that these states are not representative of the United States as a whole: they are more overwhelmingly white, rural, and wealthy than the national average, and neither is in the fast-growing West or South.
"Conversely, states that traditionally hold their primaries in June, like California (the most populous state overall) and New Jersey (the most densely populated state), usually end up having no say in who the presidential candidate will be. As stated above, the races were usually over well before June. California and New Jersey moved their primaries to February for the 2008 election, but in 2012 both states ended up moving them back to June. California lawmakers stated that consolidating their presidential and statewide primary election in June saves them about $100 million, and that it is not worth the cost when there is generally no competitive balance between the two political parties within California.
"In 2005, the primary commission of the Democratic National Committee began considering removing Iowa and New Hampshire from the top of the calendar, but this proposal never gained approval, so those two states remain as the first two contests. New Hampshire also fought back by obliging candidates who wanted to campaign in the state to pledge to uphold that primary as the first one."
Joe Biden, to his considerable credit, refused to sign that pledge, but won New Hampshire anyway due to the write-in vote (of course, it helps when you're the incumbent.)
Andrew, I'd like to add one final criticism of my own. These primaries are taxpayer-funded, making the Democratic and Republican parties somewhat more "official" and seemingly more "moderate" than smaller parties such as the Greens or the Libertarians, and less likely to nominate, and thus elect, potentially destabilizing radicals to the highest office in the land. Well, we saw how well that worked in 2016, and how well it's working now, haven't we?
Oh, Andrew, I almost forgot, you also mentioned this:
"However, in the background I think government departments work away behind the scenes to ameliorate the excesses of your possible President, the excesses that have gotten through notwithstanding."
Trump supporters tend to refer to that as the "deep state".
Andrew, a correction I'd like to make in my reponse to your comment:
These primaries are taxpayer-funded, making the Democratic and Republican parties somewhat more "official" and seemingly more "moderate" than smaller parties such as the Greens or the Libertarians, and, OR SO THE ARGUMENT GOES, less likely to nominate, and thus elect, potentially destabilizing radicals to the highest office in the land. Well, we saw how well that worked in 2016, and how well it's working now, haven't we?
Debra, you may have to narrow your prayer to the Electoral College (which often skews in favor of the less populated parts of the country.) Trump had never won the popular vote.
In order to keep the hucksters, humbugs, scoundrels, psychos, morons, and last but not least, artificial intelligentsia at bay, I have decided to turn on comment moderation. On the plus side, I've gotten rid of the word verification.
And some of those pictured didn't have souls left to sell. I wonder what they traded for their free ride to Hell.
ReplyDeleteMedia exposure, Mitchell.
DeleteI don't understand what these primaries are about but oh, the horror of Trump being president again. However, in the background I think government departments work away behind the scenes to ameliorate the excesses of your possible President, the excesses that have gotten through not withstanding.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, here's what Wikipedia has to say about primaries:
Delete"Each of the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and territories of the United States holds either primary elections or caucuses to help nominate individual candidates for president of the United States. This process is designed to choose the candidates that will represent their political parties in the general election.
"The United States Constitution has never specified this process; political parties have developed their own procedures over time. Some states hold only primary elections, some hold only caucuses, and others use a combination of both. These primaries and caucuses are staggered, generally beginning sometime in January or February, and ending about mid-June before the general election in November. State and local governments run the primary elections, while caucuses are private events that are directly run by the political parties themselves. A state's primary election or caucus is usually an indirect election: instead of voters directly selecting a particular person running for president, they determine the number of delegates each party's national convention will receive from their respective state. These delegates then in turn select their party's presidential nominee. The first state in the United States to hold its presidential primary was North Dakota in 1912, following on Oregon's successful implementation of its system in 1910."
Andrew, a common criticism of the caucus-and-primary system:
"Because they are the states that traditionally hold their respective contests first, the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary usually attract the most media attention; however, critics, such as Mississippi secretary of state Eric Clark and Tennessee senator William Brock, point out that these states are not representative of the United States as a whole: they are more overwhelmingly white, rural, and wealthy than the national average, and neither is in the fast-growing West or South.
"Conversely, states that traditionally hold their primaries in June, like California (the most populous state overall) and New Jersey (the most densely populated state), usually end up having no say in who the presidential candidate will be. As stated above, the races were usually over well before June. California and New Jersey moved their primaries to February for the 2008 election, but in 2012 both states ended up moving them back to June. California lawmakers stated that consolidating their presidential and statewide primary election in June saves them about $100 million, and that it is not worth the cost when there is generally no competitive balance between the two political parties within California.
"In 2005, the primary commission of the Democratic National Committee began considering removing Iowa and New Hampshire from the top of the calendar, but this proposal never gained approval, so those two states remain as the first two contests. New Hampshire also fought back by obliging candidates who wanted to campaign in the state to pledge to uphold that primary as the first one."
Joe Biden, to his considerable credit, refused to sign that pledge, but won New Hampshire anyway due to the write-in vote (of course, it helps when you're the incumbent.)
Andrew, I'd like to add one final criticism of my own. These primaries are taxpayer-funded, making the Democratic and Republican parties somewhat more "official" and seemingly more "moderate" than smaller parties such as the Greens or the Libertarians, and less likely to nominate, and thus elect, potentially destabilizing radicals to the highest office in the land. Well, we saw how well that worked in 2016, and how well it's working now, haven't we?
Oh, Andrew, I almost forgot, you also mentioned this:
Delete"However, in the background I think government departments work away behind the scenes to ameliorate the excesses of your possible President, the excesses that have gotten through notwithstanding."
Trump supporters tend to refer to that as the "deep state".
Andrew, a correction I'd like to make in my reponse to your comment:
DeleteThese primaries are taxpayer-funded, making the Democratic and Republican parties somewhat more "official" and seemingly more "moderate" than smaller parties such as the Greens or the Libertarians, and, OR SO THE ARGUMENT GOES, less likely to nominate, and thus elect, potentially destabilizing radicals to the highest office in the land. Well, we saw how well that worked in 2016, and how well it's working now, haven't we?
I pray that America is smart enough to reject him.
ReplyDeleteDebra, you may have to narrow your prayer to the Electoral College (which often skews in favor of the less populated parts of the country.) Trump had never won the popular vote.
DeleteHello Kirk, I'll be sure to send my mail-in vote Registered/Special Delivery!
ReplyDelete--Jim
The mail-in vote is what saved the day in 2020, Jim.
DeleteThere are a lot of people missing from that toon.
ReplyDeleteMike, maybe Luckovich ran out of ink.
DeleteFingers crossed x
ReplyDeleteMy toes too, John.
Delete