The Geek Forum

Main Forums => Political Opinions => Topic started by: Vespertine on February 13, 2008, 03:50:18 PM

Title: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: Vespertine on February 13, 2008, 03:50:18 PM

As you all know, I'm a Libertarian.  As such, the primaries are really only interesting to me from a spectator sport point of view.  Here's what I'm finding interesting.  Let's say that Obama wins enough pledged delegates to get the majority.  What happens if Clinton's superdelegates (who answer to NO ONE by the way) then put her at a higher total than Obama?  Do you foresee something like changing the nature of primaries or the use of superdelegates?

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: pbsaurus on February 13, 2008, 04:02:24 PM

The parties are private entities so they can do whatever they want.  The fact that the states have to run elections for them is ridiculous.  They should pay for them themselves.  My tax dollars shouldn't subsidize this spectacle.

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: reimero on February 13, 2008, 04:07:26 PM

I agree with pbsaurus on all counts.  Having said that, I think the bigger issue is the negating of votes in Michigan and Florida (both presumed Hillary strongholds) which may well have boosted Obama's momentum.

Remember, primary voting is all about voting for the candidate you think will win, not the one you think will do the best job.

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: Joe Sixpack on February 22, 2008, 02:50:09 PM

Violent revolution against a tyrannical government is your patriotic duty as an American.

To answer the question in a more useful way, if the superdelegates were to thwart the will of the people, so to speak, it would be a huge black eye on the party.  I'm not sure Obama's cultists would stand for it.

Thwarting the will of the people is what Republicans are supposed to do.

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: Agent_Tachyon on February 22, 2008, 04:51:21 PM

Sic semper tyrannus.

I know it's not quite so dramatic if you don't shoot the president after saying it, but it seemed appropriate.

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: ivan on February 25, 2008, 01:37:10 PM

Party candidates should be selected by fat cigar-smoking men in windowless rooms behind speakeasies. Primaries are like having meetings about having meetings.

Ok, times have changed, and I suppose women should be involved in selecting party candidates. But they still have to be fat and smoke cigars.

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: Agent_Tachyon on February 25, 2008, 05:02:01 PM

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of electing a leader who's never even TRIED a cigar.

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: dcrog on February 25, 2008, 05:22:02 PM

Define tried.

I think Monica tried one with Bill, if I'm remembering my rumors right.  Who says Hillary hasn't? 

Title: Re: Interesting Question (maybe)
Post by: ivan on February 25, 2008, 05:45:44 PM

Quote from: Agent_Tachyon on February 25, 2008, 05:02:01 PM

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of electing a leader who's never even TRIED a cigar.

Well, there's still time for Obama to try one.

Or wait... were you talking about McCain?