If voters in Montana would have had the same choices as Iowa,

pegleg

(788 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 11:37 AM
Original message

If voters in Montana would have had the same choices as Iowa,

would things have turned out differently? That's the reason we need total election reform. It's really a joke the way it is handled today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Fresh_Start

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 11:42 AM
Response to Original message

1. I voted for my candidate after he withdrew

it sucks...but I'm not voting Republican out of frustration or spite

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pegleg

(788 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #1

3. well neither am I , but it still sucks. And I like Obama, but people deserve

Edited on Wed Jun-04-08 11:46 AM by pegleg

a choice equal to other states.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Fresh_Start

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #3

4. yes, there is nothing to love about the current system

and it should be completely redone

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sandnsea

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 11:42 AM
Response to Original message

2. No

The west is not the south and not appalachia.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mainegreen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 11:55 AM
Response to Original message

5. Would they have turned out differently in Montana?

Probably.

Would they have turned out differently overall?
Who knows.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Old and In the Way

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 12:11 PM
Response to Original message

6. Rotating regional primaries seems to be the only solution.

Regionalizing the primary process allows candidates that don't have rich donors or independent wealth some leverage in the process. Rotating the primary schedule would give any region a chance (eventually) to lead the process.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pegleg

(788 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #6

7. If we can have all the states vote in a general election, then certainly we

can do the same in a primary system. Of course, funding for each major candidate would need to equalized or at least there would need to be a minimum amount for each candidate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Old and In the Way

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #7

8. Clean elections should be the way to go.

Every candidate forgoes private contributions and the state government (federal gov for Presidential races) pays a set rate. Take most of the profit motive and corruption out of the political process. Works well in Maine. If your opponent opts out, the state will match the private contributions of your opponent. So it takes the incentive out of going that route and allows the candidates to focus on the issues instead of on fundraising.

Oh, and if you abuse the process - this happens: http://www.sunjournal.com/story/268491-3/LewistonAuburn/Former_Lewiston_rep_going_to_jail/

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pegleg

(788 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #8

9. perfect

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

book_worm

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-04-08 02:52 PM
Response to Original message

10. Obama would have won with Edwards second and Hillary third

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 02nd 2024, 07:53 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.