| Greedo909 |
03-16-2016 15:18 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by MC Hamster
(Post 18542084)
The fact that political parties even go through the motions of 'electing' a representative in all this public debate crud is frankly weird. They're always going to pick their own public face internally, based on all sorts of factional internal politicking. That you would think of it as anything even vaguely resembling a democratic process in the first place is odd. The 'democracy' comes when you decide whether you want that person representing you or not at as President. Primaries are who the parties wants representing them in that race. Completely separate processes.
|
So what is the point of even having a primary election or debate? The parties have at least some interest in keeping a facade of democracy or they wouldn't exist. I was under no impression that it was a democratic process--see my Ron Paul remark, but nice strawman. However, I'd guess the average person does not understand that this process only exists to manufacture consent and create the illusion that they aren't being disenfranchised.
Quote:
I'm also not sure why you're *****ing about "the two parties" controlling everything. This is their own internal ****, of course they control it. What the hell do you expect? A minor party member standing for the nomination of a party he's not part of?
|
Every step of the election process is controlled by the two-parties-- the debates between parties, the ballots, and with pre-canned nominees, in the end we are given a choice of two establishment turds. If you are Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders, you are forced into symbolically joining a political party that you barely fit into just to get into the race and be heard--assuming you're willing to declare complete loyalty to the party knowing full well that you will eventually be screwed if you manage to gain the popular vote. Please explain to me where the democratic process actually exists.
|
