LogFAQs > #934648880

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, Database 6 ( 01.01.2020-07.18.2020 ), DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 270: Bloomberg/Clinton 2020 Campaign HQ
HeroDelTiempo17 02/20/20 3:31:41 PM #488:	pxlated posted... but anyway, plurality in a 6 candidate race might not be the best way to decide the nominee, but do you think 700 establishment elites who are clearly and openly biased against particular candidates deciding it is better or more democratic? obviously the whole thing is fucked up. and "the process we have is the process we have" and all that, sure. but good lord is it disgusting and leads to candidates who very, very obviously have no path forward sticking around because they think they can win on the second ballot. It's not more democratic but the convention exists to allow the party to build a coalition and choose a consensus candidate when the shitty democratic option fails them. It's a compromise solution. I can and will blame the Democratic establishment for not having a better primary voting system, but I honestly dont think FPTP is any more definitively democratic. pxlated posted... this is a pointless question to ask and you know it - not only can i not actually now what i would do in this situation until it happens, even if i felt like i would be arguing that biden shouldn't get it in this scenario, why would i admit to that? To rephrase it's just asking if you would support the plurality vote winner no matter who it is, even if the tides change and it ends up being Biden or Bloomberg. I wouldn't! ChaosTonyV4 posted... He literally called for ranked choice voting like 2 weeks ago, so hes certainly still for it, I dont see why these things are mutually exclusive so if youd care to elaborate I would appreciate it, because I dont understand your point. Put simply, I don't think he argues the plurality winner should be the nominee if he wasn't the current projected plurality winner. I think it is a cynical move to increase pressure on the establishment, not something he'd consider otherwise. And that's probably the right play, but he's still full of shit! --- DPOblivion was far more determined than me. <cite>HeroDelTiempo17 posted [p:934648880] in Politics C... [t:78417742]...</cite> <quote>pxlated posted... </cite> <quote>but anyway, plurality in a 6 candidate race might not be the best way to decide the nominee, but do you think 700 establishment elites who are clearly and openly biased against particular candidates deciding it is better or more democratic? obviously the whole thing is fucked up. and "the process we have is the process we have" and all that, sure. but good lord is it disgusting and leads to candidates who very, very obviously have no path forward sticking around because they think they can win on the second ballot.</quote> It's not more democratic but the convention exists to allow the party to build a coalition and choose a consensus candidate when the shitty democratic option fails them. It's a compromise solution. I can and will blame the Democratic establishment for not having a better primary voting system, but I honestly dont think FPTP is any more definitively democratic. pxlated posted... </cite> <quote>this is a pointless question to ask and you know it - not only can i not actually now what i would do in this situation until it happens, even if i felt like i would be arguing that biden shouldn't get it in this scenario, why would i admit to that?</quote> To rephrase it's just asking if you would support the plurality vote winner no matter who it is, even if the tides change and it ends up being Biden or Bloomberg. I wouldn't! ChaosTonyV4 posted... </cite> <quote> He literally called for ranked choice voting like 2 weeks ago, so hes certainly still for it, I dont see why these things are mutually exclusive so if youd care to elaborate I would appreciate it, because I dont understand your point.</quote> Put simply, I don't think he argues the plurality winner should be the nominee if he wasn't the current projected plurality winner. I think it is a cynical move to increase pressure on the establishment, not something he'd consider otherwise. And that's probably the right play, but he's still full of shit! --- DPOblivion was far more determined than me.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1