Primary differences

[Eeset]

All the primaries for the Democrats use proportional representation. That means if you get 30% of the vote then you get 30% of the delegates in that state. Not so with the Republicans. Many of the Republican primaries are either winner take all or winner take most. That means if you get 30% of the votes and win because no one else gets as many then you get 100% of the delegates in that state. What is the effect of this? Well, it means Trump could lock up the nomination without ever winning 50% of the vote in any state. Romney essentially did that. Trump knows how these numbers work. It is to his advantage to have multiple adversaries. All he has to do is have a few more votes than the closest competition.

 

[chrysostom]

since you have spent some time looking into this

can you tell us which ones are winner take all?

 

[Eeset]

Here is a link to the list ....

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/R-DSVE.phtml?sort=d

 

[chrysostom]

thank you for that
now
tell me why you care about republican primaries

 

[Eeset]

I don't trust Hilary. But, the Republicans are not coming up with strong candidates. This is the year of the losers. :idunno:

 

[Rusha]

I don't trust Hilary. But, the Republicans are not coming up with strong candidates. This is the year of the losers. :idunno:

Indeed. Being that it will most likely be Trump or Cruz who end up as the Republican nominee, the lesser of two evils, Trump, is still undesirable.

 

[patrick jane]

All the primaries for the Democrats use proportional representation. That means if you get 30% of the vote then you get 30% of the delegates in that state. Not so with the Republicans. Many of the Republican primaries are either winner take all or winner take most. That means if you get 30% of the votes and win because no one else gets as many then you get 100% of the delegates in that state. What is the effect of this? Well, it means Trump could lock up the nomination without ever winning 50% of the vote in any state. Romney essentially did that. Trump knows how these numbers work. It is to his advantage to have multiple adversaries. All he has to do is have a few more votes than the closest competition.

Go Trump !!

 

[intojoy]

Trump

 

[chrysostom]

I don't trust Hilary. But, the Republicans are not coming up with strong candidates. This is the year of the losers. :idunno:

I hear that a lot
but
you can't trust anyone
who
would support the democratic party
because
the democratic party supports abortion

 

[Rusha]

I hear that a lot
but
you can't trust anyone
who
would support the democratic party
because
the democratic party supports abortion

As does the republican party ...

 

[chrysostom]

As does the republican party ...

are you watching the court
as it rules on union dues?

can you guess as to how they will vote?

 

[PureX]

All the primaries for the Democrats use proportional representation. That means if you get 30% of the vote then you get 30% of the delegates in that state. Not so with the Republicans. Many of the Republican primaries are either winner take all or winner take most. That means if you get 30% of the votes and win because no one else gets as many then you get 100% of the delegates in that state. What is the effect of this? Well, it means Trump could lock up the nomination without ever winning 50% of the vote in any state. Romney essentially did that. Trump knows how these numbers work. It is to his advantage to have multiple adversaries. All he has to do is have a few more votes than the closest competition.

The real problem that the republican voters are having is that they have no viable candidates to vote for. And that's the plain truth.

Even as absurdly lockstep as republican voters tend to be, and as willing to vote for satan himself rather than any democrat or independent as they are, the party honchos still can't find a candidate that's realistic to even that willing of a constituency. Let's face it. No one actually believes Donald Trump is a qualified and reasonable choice for president. And yet he continues to lead in the republican polls because the others are equally unqualified, and equally ignorant and dishonest. So the deeply partisan republican voters are sticking with Trump simply because he's the best known of the idiotic collection of horrible candidates being offered to them by their party. And they think that perhaps his notoriety could get him elected. Whereas the others really don't have a prayer.

Frankly, I think republican voters are getting what they've deserved for along time. They've allowed themselves to be grossly manipulated for decades by their own ignorance, prejudice, and bile, and now their getting tossed a collection of ridiculous candidates, as a result, because the republican party honchos know they'll vote for whatever crap they throw at them.

Unfortunately for the republican honchos, Donald Trump knows it, too.

 

[Rusha]

are you watching the court
as it rules on union dues?

can you guess as to how they will vote?

I can guess that you *try* to assume and do a whole lot of talking for other people. :idunno:

 

[chrysostom]

The real problem that the republicans are having is that they have no viable candidates. And that's the plain truth.

oh no
purex will have to vote for hillary
and
it will be our fault

why can't we find an alternative?

 

[Rusha]

frankly, I think republican voters are getting what they've deserved for along time. They've allowed themselves to be grossly manipulated for decades by their own ignorance, prejudice, and bile, and now their getting tossed a collection of ridiculous candidates, as a result, because the republican party honchos know they'll vote for whatever crap they throw at them.

Unfortunately for the republican honchos, Donald Trump knows it, too.

^ This.

 

[chrysostom]

I can guess that you *try* to assume and do a whole lot of talking for other people. :idunno:

can the democratic party survive an adverse ruling by the court on union dues?

 

[Desert Reign]

All the primaries for the Democrats use proportional representation. That means if you get 30% of the vote then you get 30% of the delegates in that state. Not so with the Republicans. Many of the Republican primaries are either winner take all or winner take most. That means if you get 30% of the votes and win because no one else gets as many then you get 100% of the delegates in that state. What is the effect of this? Well, it means Trump could lock up the nomination without ever winning 50% of the vote in any state. Romney essentially did that. Trump knows how these numbers work. It is to his advantage to have multiple adversaries. All he has to do is have a few more votes than the closest competition.

The problem with many forms of proportional representation is that it is both possible and common that you get a leader who is the least disliked, not a leader who is the most liked. Thus you get leaders who are nonchalant and watery. Trump and Cruz are certainly not that. I hope that Americans are not jealous of someone just because he got more votes than someone else? I would regard it as the more noble reaction to congratulate your opponent when he wins instead of moaning that he got less than half the votes. The fact is that if the winner got less than half the votes, the losing candidates got even less. So why complain? The losing candidates have only themselves to blame.
I am speaking as an outsider here of course. It is not my concern who gets elected in your country. But my ear sometimes pricks up in these discussions. You said, for instance 'Trump knows how these numbers work. It is to his advantage to have multiple adversaries.' But did you not realise that all the candidates also knew how these numbers work. You seem to be casting Trump as some kind of evil manipulator. But all the candidates are in an equal position here. Any one of them could pick up the nomination without getting 50% of the votes. So I am just hearing sour grapes here. Perhaps I am wrong, but this is how it comes across from an outsider.

 

[Eeset]

But did you not realise that all the candidates also knew how these numbers work. You seem to be casting Trump as some kind of evil manipulator. But all the candidates are in an equal position here. Any one of them could pick up the nomination without getting 50% of the votes. So I am just hearing sour grapes here. Perhaps I am wrong, but this is how it comes across from an outsider.

Actually I admire Trump. And no I don't think the other candidates really grasp how the primary system plays out. The other candidates keep trying to sell their careers as elected officials as if that counts for anything in these primaries. It doesn't. I once read that a leader is someone with the insight to see where a stampede is heading and the skill to then get in front of it and say "follow me". Only after you manage that can you steer the herd.

 

[Desert Reign]

Actually I admire Trump. And no I don't think the other candidates really grasp how the primary system plays out. The other candidates keep trying to sell their careers as elected officials as if that counts for anything in these primaries. It doesn't. I once read that a leader is someone with the insight to see where a stampede is heading and the skill to then get in front of it and say "follow me". Only after you manage that can you steer the herd.

Thanks. I don't understand what this all means, but I am glad you do!