Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Welcome to Christforums the Protestant Community. You'll need to register in order to post your comments on your favorite topics and subjects. You'll also enjoy sharing media across multiple platforms. We hope you enjoy your fellowship here! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christforums

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy. God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now
ChatterBox

Rigged primaries?

Recommended Posts

OK, I'm not that familiar with US politics or electoral system but I stumbled over this: Pelosi: “I Don’t See Anything Inappropriate” In Rigging Primaries

 

As it is not from a journalist I read very often, and nothing's in the news over here is this actually legitimate? Candidate selection here is mainly done within the parties before going to the polls with a candidate, but if a party declared an open selection that allowed people or party members to vote for their candidate (e.g. Labour's leadership election), and was then caught rigging it, they'd be vilified.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the sheeple in the democrat party don't see anything wrong with the party attempting to rig the primary in favor of HRC.  Scary to think what they would do for a general election.......oh, that's right.  They got the swamp to start an investigation on Trump colluding with Russia when in fact it was the democrats that were doing the colluding.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree - i think rigging is justified as the right thing to do - but i don't get how they justify it

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/2/2018 at 5:26 PM, Truthfrees said:

i agree - i think rigging is justified as the right thing to do - but i don't get how they justify it

 

Justification?

It’s for the good of the people, the country. 

Government knows best and since those who are the government have more resources to acquire the knowledge necessary they are in position to make the right decisions for the people. 

 

 

Edited by Potluck
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Potluck said:

 

Justification?

It’s for the good of the people, the country. 

Government knows best since those who are the government have more resources to acquire the knowlwdge to make the right decision. 

 

 

i guess that is what they tell each other - and perhaps they really believe it - but that would be a type of error to think they know better than all the rest of us as per 2 Timothy 3:13 - especially considering their success rate is so poor -

 

they seem really good at making messes - and really bad about cleaning them up - as PT is now clearly demonstrating - so surely they should see how they have failed for decades and PT is succeeding immediately  

Edited by Truthfrees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither party is part of government . Rigged primaries is each parties business. Democrat or Republicans,  including the lesser parties, are not a branch of the government.  

I dont trust much of what either say or do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think there are times that parties do things that favor a candidate or maybe does something like favoring all incumbents over newcomers. That's one thing.

Rigging things is a bit more behind the scenes. Least that is how I picture it.

Shoot, I am a huge Lincoln fan. Not that I think him perfect by any means.

His being nominated to represent the Republican Party in 1860 as the presidential candidate had some of both of those scenarios perhaps and some plain smart approaches to delegates who were for other candidates.

Edited by Bull of the Woods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

But the Lincoln convention moves were not the work of the national party leadership. It was by him and his team primarily. He was somewhat of a dark horse. Maybe not as much so as some see it. He was definitely not the favorite going into the Chicago convention.

Edited by Bull of the Woods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Primaries can be rigged to a parties desire. After all, the primary is for the party itself, not the general public. If the general election were rigged that would be a different matter altogether. But a party can put forth whatever candidate it wishes and if they want to favor a candidate over another, that is the right of the party.

 

That being said, if one of the other primary candidates is beaten, they can always run as an independent. If they truly had enough support they would be able to win in this fashion.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were no official parties at the earliest days. Then a good period of time when parties morphed around. Split and recombine. Dissappear. 

And eventually we got to a strictly two party system that is entrenched. Basically the parties ARE government entities. It's a bogus sham. If there was real choice, which to me is something other than poison a or poison b, the way primaries are conducted would not matter much. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Bull of the Woods said:

There were no official parties at the earliest days.

This depends on what you consider the earliest days.  Do you mean the earliest days of the nation overall, or the earliest days meaning the time of the Constitution?

 

56 minutes ago, Bull of the Woods said:

And eventually we got to a strictly two party system that is entrenched. Basically the parties ARE government entities. It's a bogus sham. If there was real choice, which to me is something other than poison a or poison b, the way primaries are conducted would not matter much. 

Of course the reality is that there is real choice already, people just fall in line and do not exercise that choice. That is on the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much even as the constitution was being argued lines were being drawn that came to be Federalists and Democratic Republicans.

I think most founders hoped it would not turn into opposing parties that just had to fight over everything and where members had to place their loyalties to the party lines on every issue rather than being loyal to the people on each issue as they honestly saw them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2018 at 6:56 AM, davidtaylorjr said:

Primaries can be rigged to a parties desire. After all, the primary is for the party itself, not the general public. If the general election were rigged that would be a different matter altogether. But a party can put forth whatever candidate it wishes and if they want to favor a candidate over another, that is the right of the party.

 

That being said, if one of the other primary

On 5/10/2018 at 6:56 AM, davidtaylorjr said:

Primaries can be rigged to a parties desire. After all, the primary is for the party itself, not the general public. If the general election were rigged that would be a different matter altogether. But a party can put forth whatever candidate it wishes and if they want to favor a candidate over another, that is the right of the party.

 

That being said, if one of the other primary candidates is beaten, they can always run as an independent. If they truly had enough support they would be able to win in this fashion.

candidates is beaten, they can always run as an independent. If they truly had enough support they would be able to win in this fashion.

David Taylor, I think that is completely wrong thinking and can't believe I'm reading this! I understand you are merely stating how things are, but We the People should be incensed by this and ready to go to war to reclaim a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

  Ready to lay my life down for the cause? Good luck with that, nobody's been able to kill me in 53 years and the powers that be choosing meaningless candidates for us to pick from don't stand a chance either.

This is overdue by 100 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2018 at 8:20 AM, davidtaylorjr said:

This depends on what you consider the earliest days.  Do you mean the earliest days of the nation overall, or the earliest days meaning the time of the Constitution?

 

Of course the reality is that there is real choice already, people just fall in line and do not exercise that choice. That is on the people.

Nonsense. There is little meaningful choice. Parties determine who is electable, and usually eliminate anyone who might actually do anything.

 

That is what the last Presidential election was about. Those content to let others think for them, mainly partisan hacks both in the media and the party itself, voted for HRC. An election between Trump and Bernie would've been a National rebuke to our current parties, and perhaps also to the whole horrible notion of a 2 party system.

 

Those thinking critically rather than accepting partisan hackery voted Trump. For many it had little to do with actually wanting that candidate; it was more about disbanding the entrenched cronies. Now we have the term 'drain the swamp.' I'd be ok with the term "fight corruption."

 

Trump better offer Trey Gowdy a good position! Replacement for Jeff Sessions would be ideal. He should've made Rand Paul his 'hatchet man.'

 

And why hasn't DeVos closed down the DoE yet? She's the perfect person to do it, and there's no other reason to have her in that position.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×