GOP robs Trump of delegates. DNC screwed Bernie.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
I will never vote for those two parties ever again.

Here's the problem with being an establishment hipster.lol? You support the underdog parties year after year because they are anti-establishment.No. Because I agree with their policies. But go on. Well what if their message catches on? Then they become popular and then when they become big enough to actually win elections and hold offices across the country, they become the establishment and you aren't allowed to vote for them anymore.

When you vote on policy and not on popularity then you will not have that problem.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I DO vote by policy. That's why I'm not beholden to a single party anymore. Maybe you should try it? Because it sounds like you are voting by party politics still.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Perhaps you are a true libertarian, but many in your ranks are not.

Most people are actually.

They just think they are right authoritarians(US democrats) or far right authoritarians(US republicans).

Most people believe in personal freedom,NAP,and ownership of their own body.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

I DO vote by policy. That's why I'm not beholden to a single party anymore. Maybe you should try it? Because it sounds like you are voting by party politics still.

Yeah and the Libertarian candidates have policies that I agree with.

So what's your point?

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Hey. Vote for whoever you feel like, but I just see you being hypocritical. Lecturing others about adhereing to the two dominant ones while you adhere to an underdog one. It's just another flavor of party politics. I'm sure you'd still be defending how much you agreed with the Libertarian policies if they were a mainstream party too. THAT is party politics.

Agree with the candidate, not his party. Parties are easier to corrupt than people, and that is saying something since people are VERY easily corruptible.

"Frankly, I've never felt voting to be all that essential to the process."

―Gerald Ford's head

It's nice to see people realizing that neither Democrats or Republicans care about what the American People want.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
"Frankly, I've never felt voting to be all that essential to the process."

―Gerald Ford's head

It's nice to see people realizing that neither Democrats or Republicans care about what the American People want.

I think it's nice to see people finally realize this after all these years.

a reply to: Sillyolme

The super delegates make their own choice. They already chose.

If Sanders gets the most pledged delegates, it's highly unlikely the superdelegates would risk alienating voters to nominate Clinton. Sanders is leading Clinton 84 to 14 among voters under 30 and 58 to 37 among voters 30-44. These are the Democratic Party's future voters and disregarding their preference would be a horrible long term strategy.

Things aren't looking good for Sanders at the moment. A lot of people are caught up in his string of recent wins but he's so far behind in the pledged delegate count that he'd need to win something like 57% of the remaining delegates. He's also down by 2.4 million raw primary votes so the argument could be made that he's currently benefiting from the primary system at the expense of "the will of the people" — he's got about 42% of the votes but 46% of the pledged delegates.

The latest NY polls have Clinton leading Sanders by 16% & 18% (Fox News and Emerson respectively, from last week). If he loses NY by even half that, it's essentially over unless Clinton is derailed by something truly catastrophic.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Hey. Vote for whoever you feel like, but I just see you being hypocritical.lol ok Lecturing others about adhering to the two dominant ones while you adhere to an underdog one.I am not adhering to the Libertarian Party.I am adhering to the LP candidate's policies It's just another flavor of party politics.No I agree with the LP candidates policies more. I'm sure you'd still be defending how much you agreed with the Libertarian policies if they were a mainstream party too.As long as the LP candidates don't change their policies for the worst. THAT is party politics.

Agree with the candidate, not his party. Parties are easier to corrupt than people, and that is saying something since people are VERY easily corruptible.

I have to agree with the policies of the candidate.

You vote on who you agree with more on policies,executive experience(governors,CEO's etc) and personal judgement.

Not what party the are aligned with.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Ok. Fair enough. So what are these policies? What are Gary Johnson's policies, and please don't link me to the Libertarian party's policies. Those are just the basic overall structure of how the candidate's policies are supposed to align. I want the nitty-gritty here. I'd like to see which policies of Johnson's warrant him being an effective candidate to vote for, and why you came to this decision.

Note: The answer, because he is the Libertarian candidate will just affirm what I'm saying in that you are voting for the party and not the candidate.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

This is already being (incorrectly) whined about on two other threads. Do we really need another?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not sure what you are getting at. Do you think its OK to disenfranchise millions of voters?

"I guess its OK because its quasi-legal", this is the response from pro Cruz people...

originally posted by: BIGPoJo

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

This is already being (incorrectly) whined about on two other threads. Do we really need another?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not sure what you are getting at. Do you think its OK to disenfranchise millions of voters?

It's ok because they are the GOP rules that have been in place and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. We all knew how it was supposed to play out (or we should have). So acting like this is some great travesty that Cruz was able to make the system work for him better than Trump did just comes across as whiny and the mark of a sore loser.

Don't like the rules? Take it up with the state of Colorado.

"I guess its OK because its quasi-legal", this is the response from pro Cruz people...

I'm not a pro-Cruz person, so there's that.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Ok. Fair enough. So what are these policies? What are Gary Johnson's policies, and please don't link me to the Libertarian party's policies. Those are just the basic overall structure of how the candidate's policies are supposed to align. I want the nitty-gritty here. I'd like to see which policies of Johnson's warrant him being an effective candidate to vote for, and why you came to this decision.

Note: The answer, because he is the Libertarian candidate will just affirm what I'm saying in that you are voting for the party and not the candidate.

Decriminalizing drugs(like Portugal and Netherlands have done) would bankrupt drug cartels and gangs.
Removing all income taxes would help small business and the working class.
Removing all corporate taxes would bring industry back into this country and de-incentivize foreign slave labor.
Protecting the right to bare arms.
Not deporting 11-12 million people and instead give them a work visa, a fine, and a pathway to full citizenship.
(the most realistic option and fair to the citizenry of the country and to the immigrants that are here)

Gary Johnson was a governor so he has executive experience.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Are you going to link me to his website where he states this? Or am I just supposed to go to the Libertarian Party homepage where all of those things are on display? Though sarcasm aside.

Not deporting 11-12 million people and instead give them a work visa, a fine, and a pathway to full citizenship.

This is the sanest approach I've ever seen suggested from a conservative political party about illegal immigration.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Are you going to link me to his website where he states this? Or am I just supposed to go to the Libertarian Party homepage where all of those things are on display? Though sarcasm aside.

Not deporting 11-12 million people and instead give them a work visa, a fine, and a pathway to full citizenship.

This is the sanest approach I've ever seen suggested from a conservative political party about illegal immigration.

www.ontheissues.org...

a reply to: BIGPoJo

Colorado doesn't have millions of Republican voters. The population of Colorado is only about 5.3 million and a quarter of those are children under the age of 18. In 2012, they Republican caucuses had a turn out of 66,027 and there were about 1.3 million votes for Romney in the General Election.

As it stands, none of the 36 delegates are bound to vote in any way, regardless of the outcome of the caucuses. That's the law. There's absolutely nothing "quasi-legal" about it. Is it right? I sure as hell wouldn't be happy with it but let's not pretend that this is something brand new and more to the point, that Trump had an issue with it prior to repeated bungling by his campaign.

Cruz Sweeps Colorado as Trump Campaign Issues Error-Filled Ballots

On Saturday, Trump backers passed out flyers at the convention site with official campaign slate of 13 delegates and 13 alternates accompanied by their three-digit number position on the 600-plus person ballot. Seven of the names, however, directed people to the wrong number and one delegate's name was misspelled. Other candidates did not have errors on their slates. In one case, an erroneous number corresponded with a Cruz supporter. A second flyer handed out by the Trump campaign contained four mismatched names and numbers.

It was the second major error concerning campaign materials this week. On Thursday, a Trump slate of three names in the 7th Congressional District convention contained two that weren't listed on the ballot. The campaign's state director, Patrick Davis, said they failed to pay the necessary fees to qualify.

The primary system sucks and it looks particularly FUBAR in Colorado but it didn't start sucking more to do Trump in.

I'm looking forward to resuscitating this argument the next time CNN has a bogus poll that says a majority of Americans want "reasonable" gun control.

"It doesn't matter what the people want, the rules say 'shall not be infringed.'"

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: BIGPoJo

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

This is already being (incorrectly) whined about on two other threads. Do we really need another?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not sure what you are getting at. Do you think its OK to disenfranchise millions of voters?

It's ok because they are the GOP rules that have been in place and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. We all knew how it was supposed to play out (or we should have). So acting like this is some great travesty that Cruz was able to make the system work for him better than Trump did just comes across as whiny and the mark of a sore loser.

Don't like the rules? Take it up with the state of Colorado.

"I guess its OK because its quasi-legal", this is the response from pro Cruz people...

I'm not a pro-Cruz person, so there's that.

But that did not happen, Cruz didn't make the system work for him, the GOPe did.

So many errors on the ballots in CO, some of which I think were intentional. Also, some of Trump's delegates got pushed out.

Lastly, they just said screw it, your vote doesn't count. If you don't see a problem with it, its because you are blinded by your hatred for Trump.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Thank you.

a reply to: theantediluvian

How many disenfranchised voters does it take before it matters?


The real reason the GOPe gave all the delegates to Cruz is so that he would qualify for rule 40 in a contested convention. He now has a majority of delegates in 8 states, thus qualifying him to be on the ticket. This is the real conspiracy, to steal the election from the will of the people. This is NOT the democracy that our founding fathers envisioned, this is NOT the democracy that we the people were promised.