It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: UKTruth
Who is Camacho Dorito
Trump. His orange-skinned ass should be in a sequel to Idiocracy.
Now, this is not a general election of course and the parties can choose who they want, but I think it's healthy that the American public wake up to the fact that in a two party system (effectively) if BOTH parties choose who they want, then ultimately the establishment can easily subvert the will of the people.
Primaries are a relatively new thing, they never had a say before that. If the people do not want their will subverted they would not vote for either party.
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: UKTruth
Now, this is not a general election of course and the parties can choose who they want, but I think it's healthy that the American public wake up to the fact that in a two party system (effectively) if BOTH parties choose who they want, then ultimately the establishment can easily subvert the will of the people.
Primaries are a relatively new thing, they never had a say before that. If the people do not want their will subverted they would not vote for either party.
Exactly. That is the point I'm trying to drive home.
The only reason this is an issue is because of sheer ignorance on Trump and his supporters.
People have no right to complain when they don't even know what the hell is going on.
originally posted by: imjack
a reply to: UKTruth
Basically if he even winks at the Gay Rights, we're not paying Federal Taxes. We want a Conservative President. We're also not joking and the only people that have told the Feds to #### off at all.
Trump has effectively exposed the corruption and instead of being thanked he is being blamed. WTF is that?
originally posted by: UKTruth
OK, that's pretty childish, really.
Wasn't the first GOP primary in the 1930's? Not sure of that.
The problem with not voting for either party is that it doesn't fix the problem. Passive acceptance is not a solution to the dangers of establishment elite choosing both candidates on offer.
Even third party's are not suitable as they don't seem to be able to get effective ballot access.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: UKTruth
OK, that's pretty childish, really.
Meh, I have said much worse.
Wasn't the first GOP primary in the 1930's? Not sure of that.
It was not a widespread practice until the 1970's. Even in the 1960''s only 12 used this system.
The problem with not voting for either party is that it doesn't fix the problem. Passive acceptance is not a solution to the dangers of establishment elite choosing both candidates on offer.
Which is why you vote for neither one. You do not have to be a Republican or Democrat to win Electoral Votes, you just need broad national appeal.
Even third party's are not suitable as they don't seem to be able to get effective ballot access.
It is not as insurmountable as people make it out to be.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: matafuchs
I do not see either party's systems as corrupt, they make rules and they publish them. It is their ball. If you want to play with it you need to follow their rules.
Petty? Yes. Corrupt? No.
originally posted by: UKTruth
I was looking through the 3rd party runs this year - I don't think any are on 50 ballots. I think the most is thirty something.
Pretty tough to win that way. I'd really like there to be a viable 3rd party run - getting out and voting for such a run is the action people should take if they want to defeat the two party closed process (assuming the third party actually has some viable policies - looking at the current crop it's a struggle to spot one!)
originally posted by: UKTruth
Maybe not corrupt... although 'petty' is probably underplaying the issue.
I would say ' for themselves and their donors' as opposed to 'for the people'.
originally posted by: UMayBRite!
They would sooner destroy the Republican party than let Trump be the nominee.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: imjack
No one in their right effing mind would vote Cruz in Colorado, this is simple people.
The party delegates sure did.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: yuppa
If they refuse their names are publcily displayed fro all colorodo people to contact them and ask them why they voted against their wishes.
How did they vote against anyone's wishes in Colorado? No one voted.