The Primary system is perfectly designed to make winners of the skilled liars

[Bonobo]

Having to cater to the most far left and far right of their party in the primaries and then turn their backs on them in the general election is a PERFECT way to promote skilled liars and those lacking the strength of their own convictions.

It results in whacked out Republicans and timid, weak-kneed Democrats.

What a system!

So for those of you who say that the Primaries is the correct and only proper place to apply pressure to the Democratic candidate/party holder, I say bullshit. It is designed so that they will promise the moon and then turn their back on you.

It is only a threat of voting against them or withholding support in the GE that will have any real bite.

[RKP5637]

1. Yep, those slinging the most/best BS with the most money win, not the best for

the country.

[Autumn]

Very true,

no argument from me. Campaign one way and govern another.

[Ohio Joe]

2. But then... Are you not just giving your vote to the most skilled liar on the other side?

And getting even less of what you want? That makes no sense.

[Keith Bee]

3. K&R

This is a worthwhile topic.

[Odin2005]

4. No, the Democratic Party Machine weeds out the true Progessives in favor of Corporatists.

That's what the Super-delegates are for, to keep the Progressive Left out.

[Fumesucker]

5. I don't see it..

If what you say is true then both sides politicians should be moderate..

Under your scenario it sounds like the Democrats are the real liars while the Republicans hew closer to what they promise their base.

[Scruffy1]

6. This is a gross oversimplification.

In my experience there are two different dynamics for state wide and local elections. Locally the primary does a pretty good job when it comes to picking congressional candidates, but when you start talking state wide offices it is very hard for a good candidate to win without big money backing. In order to get the big money it is necessary to tow the corporate line more and more.

Here in Minnesota we have the strange caucus system before the primary which allows those "outside" access. This process gave us Keith Elison, but also got us Michelle Bachmann when she was able to flood the sparsely attended caucus
with her kooky minions. There's still a primary, but it comes in late summer, much to late to mount a campaign for office.

Running for national office has been escalating in expense for years and I don't believe that any kind of campaign finance reform will help, since the media has become a fascist echo chamber where news is just propaganda and all the media is controlled by a small group. The most I hope for from my politicians is maybe not being tossed into the dungeon for my beliefs-which is a very real threat and not just paranoia. The recent FBI raids on Women Against Military Madness and others are just one example. Of course not one politician has spoken up against these raids.

Everyone can draw their own conclusions, but after forty years plus of political involvement I've come to the same conclusion that Senator Hughes from Iowa came to many years ago: That politics is incapable of changing the world.
His answer was to quit and start a prayer camp. My belief is that change must come from outside the political arena and that politicians are followers not leaders.

[cprise]

7. Political effectiveness varies over time

You should watch this: http://www.archive.org/details/AdamCurtis_TheMayfairSet