No Elephants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-24-10 06:26 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
| 37. Where are you getting all that about the electoral college? |
| -Democrats discuss whether to do away with 'superdelegates' |
alp227 |
May-22-10 02:12 AM |
#0 |
 -
Have the superdelegates ever voted against the majority? |
boppers |
May-22-10 02:26 AM |
#1 |
 -
Do they have the potential to create the appearance of |
quakerboy |
May-22-10 03:06 AM |
#2 |
 -
What is the point of the electoral college? |
boppers |
May-22-10 04:50 AM |
#4 |
| -
Define Mob Rule nt |
rpannier |
May-22-10 05:53 AM |
#6 |
| -
The actual party members having a say, as compared to the fat cat mostly-incumbents. (NT) |
Tesha |
May-22-10 06:47 AM |
#7 |
| -
The current rash of anti-Latino legislation in Arizona, |
Bette Noir |
May-22-10 08:31 AM |
#12 |
| -
There's nothing unconstitutional about primaries selecting a nominee though, so the analogy doesn't |
No Elephants |
May-24-10 06:20 AM |
#36 |
| -
Nice to know what you think of the people having the vote. Perhaps |
saracat |
May-22-10 10:42 AM |
#18 |
| -
The point of the electoral college |
The Green Manalishi |
May-22-10 10:57 AM |
#20 |
| -
Electoral College Realities |
mvymvy |
May-23-10 05:42 PM |
#29 |
| -
The National Popular Vote bill |
mvymvy |
May-23-10 05:43 PM |
#30 |
| -
Big City Realities |
mvymvy |
May-23-10 05:44 PM |
#31 |
| -
in 2004 |
tabbycat31 |
May-24-10 10:48 AM |
#39 |
| -
Where are you getting all that about the electoral college? |
No Elephants |
May-24-10 06:26 AM |
#37 |
| -
Primaries are "mob rule?" LOL |
No Elephants |
May-24-10 06:09 AM |
#35 |
| -
Good argument for eliminating them, then. |
No Elephants |
May-24-10 06:06 AM |
#34 |
| -
Do away with it. |
Enthusiast |
May-22-10 03:48 AM |
#3 |
| -
+1,000 |
Dinger |
May-22-10 06:51 AM |
#8 |
| -
+1000 too! |
CLANG |
May-22-10 08:44 AM |
#13 |
| -
For example, Supreme Court justices |
Igel |
May-22-10 03:43 PM |
#22 |
| -
Yep. The spirit AND the letter. IOW, it's undemocratic, plain and simple. |
No Elephants |
May-24-10 06:29 AM |
#38 |
| -
Superdelegates Keep the DLC Alive---Get Rid of Them |
Demeter |
May-22-10 05:31 AM |
#5 |
| -
Disgusting waste |
saigon68 |
May-22-10 08:11 PM |
#25 |
| -
I think they are a waste of time |
Bitwit1234 |
May-22-10 06:51 AM |
#9 |
| -
The media chooses the candidate, so why have the supers? |
robinblue |
May-22-10 08:06 AM |
#10 |
| -
What tie? I remember Mr. President holding a commanding lead. |
Bette Noir |
May-22-10 08:29 AM |
#11 |
| -
Look again. It was close. Not a tie but close and the superdelegates could have swayed it. |
saracat |
May-22-10 10:48 AM |
#19 |
| -
You are right about the closeness of the race but wrong about pledged delegates |
dsc |
May-23-10 06:26 PM |
#33 |
| -
They should just create some "ultra-super-delegates." |
woo me with science |
May-22-10 09:15 AM |
#14 |
| -
The only purpose of Superdelegates is to enable the DLC to thwart the will of the voters. |
salguine |
May-22-10 09:16 AM |
#15 |
| -
Actually, I like superdelegates |
D-Lee |
May-22-10 10:18 AM |
#16 |
| -
"they help assure some political saviness and steadiness" ...oh, please, |
Stardust |
May-22-10 10:38 AM |
#17 |
| -
Right. Because we can't have the rabble choosing. |
EFerrari |
May-22-10 04:02 PM |
#23 |
| -
No, they don't |
Missy Vixen |
May-23-10 11:15 AM |
#28 |
| -
Whatever. |
Arkana |
May-22-10 11:01 AM |
#21 |
| -
I give this headline an A for the best ironic headline in recent memory |
EFerrari |
May-22-10 04:03 PM |
#24 |
| -
seems like you need something like this at any rate. we are a party. |
mopinko |
May-22-10 08:16 PM |
#26 |
| -
Eliminate them! It is how the DLC maintains power. |
Odin2005 |
May-22-10 09:06 PM |
#27 |
| -
Yes, eliminate the superdelegates... |
hayu_lol |
May-23-10 05:56 PM |
#32 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread