This isn’t American Idol, people. Look how well that shit works out. Where’s your Taylor Hicks now, Scarecrow?

um, sadly, no. this idea is called runoff or preferential voting and we don’t have it and we should; it would go a long way to making America the actual home of the free and a better democracy. but of course will never happen because of American exceptionalism in that people think our way is the best way. it isn’t. hasn’t been. will not be as long as we have this belief in American exceptionalism, constantly stoked by the conservatives and the media and the ignorant rubes among whom we live.

(the primary system is a broken system, everyone knows it, but nobody seemed to care until the Clintons came along…. funny, they didn’t complain when Bill won using that system….)

but i ramble…..

I’m trying to envision a situation where it’s mathematically possible to lose the primary but win the general. In other words, the primaries already by nature produce the candidates with the best chance of winning in November (although this may be less true for the Democrats, since they use a primary system different from the general).

You’d have to build a broad electoral coalition to co-opt support from your rivals anyway, so even if there were five candidates they’d still have to upset their respective bases once in a while.

Yes, but all the people who voted for someone other than Obama or McCain no longer (supposedly) have those choices, do they?

What if the primaries WERE the general election would get closer to what I’d like to see voters doing.

You speak the truth. Relative youth is a huge draw for young’ins, as is (let’s just admit it) ethnicity. But if I had to rank Sen. Obama’s positions in order of interest to the liberal college sector at least at the university I’m attending, it’d be-

1) Iraq War.
2) Drilling v. fuel standards and conservation. (i.e. Energy)
3) Universal (or near, at least) health care.
4) Ending (or at least softening) the era of pighead diplomacy.
5) Education funding.

Somewhere down around 48 or 49) FISA.

I’m doubtful that the young and hopeful know what FISA is, so no, I don’t think it will discourage them too much.

Look, Sean, I get what you’re saying, but you need to see the bigger picture. Am I going to agree with everything Barack does or says? No, of course not. But do I think he is going to let the Constitution remain watered down after he’s elected? No, I don’t. (Sorry to sound like Rumsfeld here, asking and answering my own questions.)

I don’t fully understand the FISA bill, or why so many Democrats would go along with it (my Senator included), but, I gotta say this and for the first time ever, I trust Obama’s judgment. Whatever happened this week will not stand for long.

And while I don’t think Obama engages in Schaudenfreude, it would be interesting to see the right wingers heads go all ‘splodey when a Democratic President has the same powers as the current crew.

I’m with you in your anger and frustration over Obama’s FISA bill vote. It’s been bothering me for days.

I will probably still vote for Obama, but that’s only because I always vote. I (now) see him as the lesser of the two evils (there really are only two choices at this point). The problem for Obama is that most people aren’t nerds of politics and they don’t feel required to vote at every election. Obama’s strength has been his ability to get previously apathetic and uninvolved people inspired and to the polls. After his vote on Wednesday, do you think young and hopeful people are going to feel inspired to back him in large numbers?

I’m feeling doubtful.

I get that. I do. But I don’t want to vote for a candidate who’s pitch basically boils down to “Well, I’m not as bad as he is.”

Fact is, if people abandoned this mindless “I have to vote for one of the two main parties, they are the only ones with a chance.” (or more accurately, vote against) insanity and actually voted FOR a candidate/party they actually LIKED, then a third party candidate would have a real chance.

Gather America in a room, tell them it’s non binding and ask them who they would actually like to see as President. Hillary would get a LOT of votes. Romney would get a bunch, as would Huckabee and Paul and even Gore. I actually think there is a very good chance several would get more than McCain.

They should vote that way in the real thing. THAT would be a real change.

Sen Jesee Jackson.

LMAO.

JK

If you can think of some way to build a third party other than from the ground up, I’ll get behind it. Until then, it strikes me as much more self-defeating to cast a protest vote for someone who has no chance. On the other hand, I don’t live in a battleground state.

No, we don’t. There is NO requirement that you have to vote for someone you find lacking.

It’s a mindset I just cannot understand. It is self-defeating and plays directly into not making the change everyone claims they want.

“a few weeks should pass before the spigot is opened again” ?? WTF?

Seriously, do you think the lesson learned by spineless politicians (I’m looking at you, Barack) will be “I’d better stop being an idiot and actually do what is popular (and has the added benefit of being right)”? Not a chance. Lesson he’ll learn: I can do whatever I want. Oh, they may pout a bit for a couple of weeks but in the end the sheep will keep giving me more money.”

Duros: Jeez, tough room.

Abso-frakin-lutely. It ought to be.