Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cincinatus' Wife
You know what is funniest of all. Everywhere I go that shows delegate numbers are different. Every last place. So if these so called experts are getting the delegate numbers wrong, how can it possibly be a fair system or maybe that is what they want. I say give each state a delegate count and make them winner takes all and that way this crazy delegate cheating system will not be available. I still think it is dumb for a 2nd or 3rd place finisher to get delegates. Why? I mean it is like in youth sports where the loser gets a trophy too since they don't want that team to feel bad. The dumbing down of America continues even when running for President. Why not keep the electoral college and the first person to get to 270 electorates get the nomination?
16 posted on 03/07/2012 1:18:06 PM PST by napscoordinator (A moral principled Christian with character is the frontrunner! Congrats Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: napscoordinator

I don’t mind the proportional method. It’s like the Electoral college. Romney zeros in on the high population centers and the rural areas have no voice.

There will be more winner take all coming down the line.


23 posted on 03/07/2012 1:33:31 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: napscoordinator

So, if a candidate manages to take 35% of the vote, with the remaining 65% going to other candidates, but split to the point that none of them manage to top 35%, then all of that state’s delegates should go to someone who the majority of the public rejected? The point of the state primaries is for delegates to be selected that provide a reasonable representation of the party at the national convention. Winner-take-all distorts this to a large degree, and would have guaranteed a Romney win by now. It isn’t “dumbing down”, it’s a system that produces a much more accurate reflection of the party voters.


34 posted on 03/07/2012 2:43:33 PM PST by JerseyanExile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: napscoordinator
Caution here: A winner-take-all system in all states would disproportionately benefit the front-runners and those with lots of money to buy expensive television ads, and make it extremely difficult for underfunded conservatives to compete after Iowa and New Hampshire.

We've already seen how the lower-ranked candidates didn't even bother to compete in winner-take-all states, pretty much conceding them to Romney and whichever other challenger had the highest polling data in that state.

The current system has problems but I don't think making everything winner-take-all is a good idea, though if a state wants to do that I don't have a problem so long as it does not become the norm.

16 posted on Wednesday, March 07, 2012 3:18:06 PM by napscoordinator: “You know what is funniest of all. Everywhere I go that shows delegate numbers are different. Every last place. So if these so called experts are getting the delegate numbers wrong, how can it possibly be a fair system or maybe that is what they want. I say give each state a delegate count and make them winner takes all and that way this crazy delegate cheating system will not be available. I still think it is dumb for a 2nd or 3rd place finisher to get delegates. Why? I mean it is like in youth sports where the loser gets a trophy too since they don't want that team to feel bad. The dumbing down of America continues even when running for President. Why not keep the electoral college and the first person to get to 270 electorates get the nomination?”

51 posted on 03/07/2012 7:48:22 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson