Question for my Democratic friends

[wing2000]

How is it democratic to have a candidate placed by the hierarchy of the party and not voted on?

Is the op expecting the DNC to conduct primaries in all 50 states to be considered "democratic"?

 

[durangodawood]

How is it democratic to have a candidate placed by the hierarchy of the party and not voted on?

Kamala was not voted into her candidacy, she was gifted the position by the Party leaders and not the voters.

Looks more like a dictatorial line of succession than a democratic process.

Curious on how you explain this.

I dont yet know the specific process by which she or another will be formally chosen. I think convention delegates are released to vote for whoever they choose if a candidate dies, drops out, etc.

If thats the process, fine. Theres no actual way to run primary do overs at this late date.

 

[Bradskii]

How is it democratic to have a candidate placed by the hierarchy of the party and not voted on?

You seem to have an odd view of the political process. It's almost identical for both Democrat and Republican parties. The 'hierarchy' effectively votes for who is going to lead the party. Compared to how that works in the UK and Australia - well, it's similar, but vastly more expensive and complex in the US. It's almost literally a show of hands in the UK and Australia. But in those two countries, the voters vote for their local representative of the party of their choice, not for the leader. The party with the most members voted for (who become ministers) forms the government. And the Prime Minister is the leader of that party and hence that government.

You guys for for one person or the other.

Seems strange that you'd complain about the Democratic process when it's virtually the same as the Republican one.

 

[AlexB23]

Is the op expecting the DNC to conduct primaries in all 50 states to be considered "democratic"?

I think so, and primaries would be a good idea. Ranked choice voting would have solved this issue, so if one steps down, the second most popular candidate could be on the ballot.

 

[wing2000]

I think so, and primaries would be a good idea. Ranked choice voting would have solved this issue, so if one steps down, the second most popular candidate could be on the ballot.

I'm all for ranked voting and a shortened US election cycle...90 days seems about right. However, with the existing system, there obviously is not enough time. In any case, the delegates determine the candidate as others have already noted.

 

[AlexB23]

I'm all for ranked voting and a shortened US election cycle...90 days seems about right. However, with the existing system, there obviously is not enough time. In any case, the delegates determine the candidate as others have already noted.

Yeah, there is not enough time. People in the future will look back on 2024 (assuming the world does not end yet), and see how we have made errors on both sides. Shortened election cycle could work. But yes, the delegates determine the candidates, though it would be nice if everyday voters could have more say. But ahh, that is just a pipe dream.

Anyways, it is getting late here, and discussing politics this late at night does not go well for me, cos I am tired.

 

[iluvatar5150]

How is it democratic to have a candidate placed by the hierarchy of the party and not voted on?

Kamala was not voted into her candidacy, she was gifted the position by the Party leaders and not the voters.

Looks more like a dictatorial line of succession than a democratic process.

Curious on how you explain this.

“It’s not a democracy. It’s a republic.”

I don’t know / don’t recall how primaries work in other states, but here in Maryland, I don’t vote for a candidate. I vote for a slate of electors who have pledged to elect a candidate. If that candidate is no longer running by the time of the convention, I assume there is a process for selecting a new candidate.

Given that our entire system of government has been set up for 250 years to have representatives act on behalf of their constituents in lieu of direct democracy, I’ve gotten used to it by now.

 

[BCP1928]

Only if it is an open convention and currently it is not.

But it can be made so under DNC rules. No harm, no fould.

This thread is about the Democrats appointing a candidate who was not even running for the office.

It's happened before, although this business of running for office for months before the convention has not done us any good. Nominating a Presidential candidate should be more about policy and the ability to carry it out than celebrity.

 

[durangodawood]

Also bear in mind the US Constitution offers no guidance for how a political party should be run. In principle these are private membership organizations who can run themselves as they see fit. I dont belong to one, so I dont demand a say. I just hope the Ds, by whatever process, offer up someone Im ok with who can beat Trump.

 

[A2SG]

How is it democratic to have a candidate placed by the hierarchy of the party and not voted on?

It happens sometimes. Like when a president dies in office, or resigns. Look at Gerald Ford, the man was never elected to office, even as a running mate.

Did you voice the same objections back then?

Kamala was not voted into her candidacy, she was gifted the position by the Party leaders and not the voters.

She ran as President Biden's running mate. Everyone who voted for Biden knew that, should something happen to Biden, she'd replace him.

Looks more like a dictatorial line of succession than a democratic process.

Not even close. See, Biden is still President. He hasn't stepped down from office, so no one has succeeded him. He only stepped down as a candidate for reelection, that's it. The Democratic Party hasn't nominated anyone to run for the office of President yet, that'll happen in a few weeks.

Curious on how you explain this.

It wasn't difficult.

-- A2SG, super easy, barely an inconvenience.....

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Why bother having primaries?

 

[A2SG]

Why bother having primaries?

If it weren't for primaries, who'd even know Iowa was still there?

-- A2SG, but I'll give New Hampshire a pass, mostly because they don't have sales tax...oh, and my mother lives there....

 

[Always in His Presence]

This is the process in many democracies. The primary system of the USA, where not only the final winner, but also candidates are voted upon, is not the norm.

Really? Then all those primary elections the Republicans just did. The ones where there was more than one candidate on the ballot.

What was that?

Now contrast it with Kamala who was on no ticket, received no votes and was not even running for office being placed as the party candidate.

 

[Larniavc]

The Dems hid this fact with the help of the media.

Did they? You’re telling us you had no idea Joe was obviously too old for office?

With all the coverage of the gaffs, getting lost, staring blankly into space, mixing up names, places in the debate with Mr Trump?

That had all been hidden by the same Media that showed all of the above quite frequently?

Really?

 

[BCP1928]

Why bother having primaries?

That's a good question. Not all states have them and the present system only dates from 1972. As I was already a voter before that, I don't have a very high opinion of the method.

 

[durangodawood]

Why bother having primaries?

Im starting to wonder. They often seem to favor the extreme ends of the party.

 

[essentialsaltes]

How is it democratic to have a candidate placed by the hierarchy of the party and not voted on?

Fortunately, due to the patient help of rightwing posters educating me on this site, I have overcome my liberal indoctrination that the US of A is a democracy. It is a republic. Party politics is very similar.

What I was really voting for was delegates to the convention, and they (in their wisdom) will vote to represent my interests at the convention.

 

[BCP1928]

Really? Then all those primary elections the Republicans just did. The ones where there was more than one candidate on the ballot.

What was that?

Now contrast it with Kamala who was on no ticket, received no votes and was not even running for office being placed as the party candidate.

That's how Lincoln got the nomination. I don't know how you, as a Conservative, feel about Lincoln, but a lot of people think it was a good choice.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Did they? You’re telling us you had no idea Joe was obviously too old for office?

With all the coverage of the gaffs, getting lost, staring blankly into space, mixing up names, places in the debate with Mr Trump?

That had all been hidden by the same Media that showed all of the above quite frequently?

Really?

It's almost like you didn't continue reading what I said. But I'll phrase it better: The Dems lied to Americans repeatedly.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Seems strange that you'd complain about the Democratic process when it's virtually the same as the Republican one.

Read the OP and I believe you will understand the issue better - keeping in mind the elections in the US is not like the UK nor Australia. Methodology from what you have written is different.

It happens sometimes. Like when a president dies in office, or resigns. Look at Gerald Ford, the man was never elected to office, even as a running mate.

Did you voice the same objections back then?

Nixon resigned (something Biden should do) and Ford became President. If Joe does the right thing and resigns - Kamala would rightfully take his place.

But just like Gerald Ford - to be re-elected she would have to go through the primary process - just like Gerald Ford he would have to campaign and demonstrate his position

He had to campaign to be his parties candidate -
It is being handed to Kamala
He had to be voted on in convention
It has already been done by Biden giving his delegates to Harris.

Hislegacy - thinks checking facts before posting helps greatly with personal credibility.