Home Main Forums General Discussion TYT: Democrats Already Rigging Next Primary?

  • Xyzse (2872 posts)
    Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

    TYT: Democrats Already Rigging Next Primary?

    Basically, California wants to move up their primaries earlier.

    Innocuous at first glance, but what this does is ensure that no one who has to build a coalition or momentum through ground-up campaigning can get a chance.  California has a large share of delegates and moving it very early would not allow political outsiders to become known enough to gain popularity.

    So, they are trying to make sure that a groundswell like Sanders would not happen again.

    snot, Spanishprof27, Wood and 12 otherskath, Ohio Barbarian, VagrantPeters, MissDeeds, RufusTFirefly, Babel 17, tokenlib, Haikugal, Mike4Bernie, jwirr, spud demon, Doremus Jessup like this

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
19 replies
  • Mike4Bernie (41 posts)
    Profile photo of Mike4Bernie Donor

    1. Hemmin' & hawin'

    Hard to watch Cenk anymore.  He sounds like herself…

    • Xyzse (2872 posts)
      Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

      2. I don't mind it too much.

      I can understand where he’s coming from.  I don’t always agree, but with lowered expectations, he’s better than mainstream media.

      • Enthusiast (9468 posts)
        Profile photo of Enthusiast Donor

        9. Better than the mainstream media is not good enough. Sorry.

        "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. There would be no place to hide."  Frank Church "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it." - Frederic Bastiat, 1848
        • Xyzse (2872 posts)
          Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

          10. You're probably right.

          To begin with, I barely trust anything nowadays that I just check on whatever is said no matter what.

        • Ohio Barbarian (4220 posts)
          Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

          16. I like Cenk. I don't always agree with him, but he's all right.

          He was a little over the top with the LOTE argument for Hillary, but a lot of people felt that way and I’m not going to hold it against them, or him.

          Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
  • Peace Patriot (2344 posts)
    Profile photo of Peace Patriot Donor

    3. Well, here's the difference between Dixie leading off and CA leading off

    Dixie:  The southern states have THE most easily riggable voting machines in the country.  All are private, corporate voting machines run on ‘TRADE SECRET’ programming code.  Most of the southern states have NO paper trail and DO NO AUDIT AT ALL (comparison of ballots to electronic results).  They are not auditable.  They cannot do a recount.

    I’m convinced that this is how Hillary Clinton planned to sweep the Dem Primary 2016, by having the DNC put the Dixie states first, rigging them for Hillary and gaining an insurmountable lead over any contenders, early on.  As it turned out, while her Dixie lead did not stop Bernie Sanders – who became THE most popular politician in the USA during the Dem Primary – it arguably cost him the nomination.  The Clinton machine needed to do more rigging down the line, but they always had that early edge.

    CA:   Allegedly the “bluest” state in the  nation, CA also has private, corporate voting machines run on ‘TRADE SECRET’ programming code; they have a paper trail but they do only a miserably inadequate 1% automatic audit.  Higher % audits and recounts are very hard to get.  The CA Dems have a history of punishing Dem Secretaries of State for being too vigilant about these machines.  In ’03-’04, they conspired to throw one Sec of State out of office on phony corruption charges – a Dem who was planning to sue Diebold, which would have alerted the nation to the riggable machines prior to the Bush/Cheney re-S/election in 2004.  A second CA Dem Sec of State – an extremely competent and vigilant SoS (who, among other things, insisted on a paper trail) – suffered a nervous breakdown in office.  I have no evidence that pressure to rig elections was responsible, but I am suspicious.  I did some number crunching on the weird Schwarzenegger special election in ’03 (125 candidates on the ballot).  It was rigged, by distributing votes among the 125 candidates.

    So, it seems that the leftist majority in this country is caught between a rock and a hard place:  Deep Dixie is extremely riggable and completely invisible.  The “bluest” state in the nation is also riggable, has been rigged before and very probably was rigged in the Dem primary 2016, along with very shady behavior by the current CA SoS during that primary, and massive disenfranchisement of recently registered voters (likely mostly Bernie voters).  On top of this, the Associated Press colluded with the Democratic Party leadership to “declare” the 2016 Primary over before anybody voted in CA.

    If these are the only two possibilities for early primaries in 2020 – Dixie states or CA – I suppose I would lean toward CA, because the system is not completely invisible, and there are millions of well-informed, alert activists in the state – activists who have become acutely aware of election rigging.  As far as I know, this is not the case in Dixie.  Also, I found the Berniecrats’ near success at taking over the CA Dem party encouraging.  It seems to me the battle lines are clear and conditions in CA are such that the true majority has a fighting chance.  But it’s a devilish choice:  between 100% riggable machines in Dixie and a highly sophisticated, corrupt and devious Democratic/Corporate machine in CA.

    I think the best chance for a presidential candidate who represents the majority in the U.S. to get a good head start in the 2020 Primary is the caucus states, where the private, corporate, ‘TRADE SECRET’ code voting systems are not a factor.  (I’m sure that’s why Bernie Sanders did very well in the caucus states in 2016.)

    If our vote counting systems were fair, honest and transparent, I would say, “yeah, for damn sure, it’s time for CA to go first.”  But our vote counting systems are not fair, honest and transparent.  They are totally fucked up.  So people voting with their feet – being there in person to raise their hands or mark a ballot and observe the counts – is the only true gage of the public will.  And those big pro-Bernie caucus numbers told the truth.  He was way more popular than Trump.  He was way more popular than Clinton.  And he still is.

    (Edit: typo correction.)

    • Xyzse (2872 posts)
      Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

      5. I agree with this.

      Thank you for writing all that, I can’t really add a thing.

    • snot (916 posts)
      Profile photo of snot Donor

      18. Thank you, Peace Patriot!

        1% “To Do” list:

      1.  Control banking; 2.  Control communications (including “news” media); 3.  Control the government; 4.  Control education ; ....

  • djean111 (4696 posts)
    Profile photo of djean111 Donor

    4. I live in Florida. Late in the game, I think.

    Anyway, I do not trust vote counts from California at all.  But – I will re-up as a Dem to vote against Harris, and if she is the candidate I absolutely will vote against her, in the way that I think will mean the most.  I would like to vote against Bill Nelson in the primary, but the Florida Dem Party has a rule that they do not support primarying incumbents.  The primary for governor will be interesting. I am sticking to not voting for, and not advocating for, DINOs.

    You think the only reason that people won't vote for a warmongering Third Way fracking-enabling cluster bomb throwing H-1B increasing lying pandering corporate and Wall Street shill who says she has no problem putting abortion rights on the table is because we are mad about Bernie?  Um, nope.
    • Xyzse (2872 posts)
      Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

      6. That's all we can do at the moment.

      I will be doing the same thing.

      I am happy I do not have to deal with Delaney any more, but I’m not sure who the replacements are.

  • RufusTFirefly (1931 posts)
    Profile photo of RufusTFirefly Donor

    7. It's a win for Big Money either way.

    As it stands, a corporatist candidate will have huge advantage over a progressive if the California primary is moved up. How can a progressive fight back against this? By raising a huge amount of money in a very short time. How do you do this? By making a deal with the devil and becoming a corporatist. Game. Set. Match.

    It’ll spell the end of retail politics.

    By the way, this is precisely why I oppose the abolition of the Electoral College, even though it puts me at odds with most of my colleagues on the left side of the political spectrum. Although its initial rationale was flawed, the Electoral College is the only thing left that keeps all 50 states in the process. With no EC, candidates will focus exclusively on the “major markets” and ignore the rest of the country. Heck, I live in one of those markets, but I still think it’s a terrible idea. Much better to retain the Electoral College and reward the electors proportionally instead of winner takes all. This will keep more of the states involved and reduce the alienation that many voters feel when their party of choice is out of sync with the traditional color of their state.

    • Xyzse (2872 posts)
      Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

      8. Yes, I've been seeing the reason for the Electoral College lately.

      And you’re absolutely right that it spells the end for retail politics.

    • JimLane (1263 posts)
      Profile photo of JimLane

      12. Off the OP's topic, but I think your analysis of the Electoral College is wrong.

      You write that

      the Electoral College is the only thing left that keeps all 50 states in the process. With no EC, candidates will focus exclusively on the “major markets” and ignore the rest of the country.

      The Electoral College most definitely does not keep all the states in the process.  Candidates virtually ignore the solidly red or solidly blue states except to raise money.  This isn’t a “major market” thing.  Candidates don’t run ads in New York City media, because all the states in that market are solidly blue, but they also don’t run ads or campaign in places like Cheyenne, Wyoming.  The only states in the process are a dozen or so swing states, some large (Pennsylvania) and some small (Nevada).

      You can see an extreme example in Nebraska, because it’s one of the two states that divides its electoral votes.  I think I’ve read that the Clinton campaign spent more money in the Omaha area than in the entire state of Wisconsin.  That’s because the one electoral vote of that Congressional district was thought to be winnable (Obama had taken it in 2008) but Wisconsin was thought to be in the bag.  I’ll hazard a guess that each candidate’s Omaha spending exceeded the non-fundraising-related spending in California, Texas, or New York as well.

      I also don’t agree that direct popular vote would lead to an exclusive focus on major markets.  Sure, a broadcast ad on a New York City station would be more valuable than one on KGWN-TV in Cheyenne, but it would also cost a lot more.  Right now we have the example of advertisers that want to reach as many people as possible — namely, the vendors of consumer goods.  They don’t focus just on major markets.  They try to sell cars and beer and so on everywhere in the country, because a sale in one place is just as good as a sale in another.  Political candidates would do the same thing.

  • mmonk (1588 posts)
    Profile photo of mmonk Donor

    11. I love Cenk and believe in his get money out of politics Wolf Pac.

    However I’m 60 years old for one more month and I see him as naive. That being said, I’ll work on the Wolf PAC agenda.

    • Xyzse (2872 posts)
      Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

      15. Same here, I mean, why not right?

      • mmonk (1588 posts)
        Profile photo of mmonk Donor

        19. Right.

  • VagrantPeters (654 posts)
    Profile photo of VagrantPeters Donor

    13. I watched this last night and to those that feel Cenk has slipped or is starting

    to slip, I ask you to watch the latest batch of TYT videos that have been posted in the last 2 days.  He has been non-stop hammering on Clinton and laying out some great stuff, like this piece.

    Take everyone with a pinch of salt but TYT is still one of the better outlets out there.

     

    "The older I get the more jazz and scotch become essential." - VP
    • Xyzse (2872 posts)
      Profile photo of Xyzse Donor

      14. As mentioned, to me he is still better than mainstream media.

      It does not matter if I like someone or not, it is still best to check up on what is being said.

      Still, I am glad to see this though, since this was an angle that I did not think of.

  • vanflower (423 posts)
    Profile photo of vanflower

    17. Not only will CA be early to help K Harris, we will also see

    more closed primaries, earlier registration cut-off dates, fewer caucuses, voter roll purges, shit maybe even caging of voters they ID as Bernie supporters – you know Kobach shit.