Skip to main content

View Diary: Kansas secretary of state (yeah, the birther guy) says Democrat can't withdraw from Senate race (281 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ah in good old democratic ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Freego10, Losty

    ...tradition make lemonade out of self grown lemons.  We have to be happy that a nationally insignificant SOS candidate has a better chance of winning while the senate race is still going republican.

    I might think differently if I lived in Kansas but I don't and probably won't.

    Just face it guys republicans are better at skulduggery, and frankly I am ok with that.  Let them be the rat bastards.

    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

    by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 02:12:12 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

      •  Oh really... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xenothaulus, ERTBen, stringer bell

        This is how I see it.  And I have probably done more in politics that you as little as I have done.

        This whole dropping out to defeat the republican reeks of desperation.  Instead of running a populist candidate and focusing on getting the huge group of people who don't vote because of disgust involved they keep trying to emulate republicans and slice and dice the 'moderate' voters.

        And dropping out can be now liked for like a decade by the republicans as democratic cowardice, or at least an absence of new ideas.  All republicans have to do now is run adds saving 'The democrats are so out of touch and devoid of ideas that even they admit they can't be taken seriously as candidates and drop out.'

        The optics of this do anything to defeat a republican are terrible in the long run even if the is a chance it will work because the republican is such an asshat.  And depending on your opponent to be incompetent to win is pitiful.  What happens when the republicans run a competent candidate with abhorrent ideas.

        We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

        by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 02:30:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "I have probably done more in politics..." (15+ / 0-)

          Just stay away from advising Democrats please.

          We need to win.

        •  Thanks (3+ / 0-)

          for your comments and concerns.

          Now located in the greatest city in the world! On 9/9, vote John Liu in SD-11 and S.J. Jung in SD-16, and let's get back the NY State Senate!

          by AndersonDelValle on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 02:40:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Who is the "populist candidate" in this case? (25+ / 0-)

          Anyone? Anyone?

          Taylor was not going anywhere. He had no money, no ability to run a campaign. Orman does and is beating Roberts in a head-to-head matchup. This was a decision made on logic and who can best win the seat.

          If this was in a blue state, I would agree with you. But this is Kansas, a state that hasn't had a Democratic senator since the Depression. Merely putting it in play is a triumph.

          And it's not like the Dems are completely abdicating in the state or anything like that. You are aware that Paul Davis appears on the verge of sending Browbeck packing, aren't you?

          •  Well lack of a bench... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            stringer bell

   a legitimate concern and development of one does not seem to be fostered by ceding the field.  And it is both a local issue and a national one, fifty state strategy anyone, that does not seem to be a priority for the democratic powers that be.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 02:54:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  The Democrat did run a populist campaign. There... (10+ / 0-)

          The Democrat did run a populist campaign. There is also a third candidate who was splitting the populist vote. The Independent running Orman ran as a Democrat in 2008. He's running as an Independent because they're in dark red Kansas. Orman, in a two person race, is beating Roberts by six points. With a three person race the chance of Roberts winning was pretty good because the get rid of Roberts vote was being divided. Now we have a great chance of kicking Roberts to the curb and getting a Democratic leaning Independent elected. This also allows Democrats in Kansas to focus more on evicting Brownback out of the Governor's mansion. I'd much rather win those two races than worry about what Republicans responses will be because their responses aren't tethered to reality any more just like your analysis of the ground game in Kansas. The number of years you've been involvedin politics really don't matter if you can't see the forest for the trees.

          •  Well if the senate candidate..... (0+ / 0-)

            ...dropping out helps you focus on the governors race why don't all the other democrats in the state drop out to help your focus.  Reductio ad absurdum.

            Oh and as to your ground game, while you tactics MIGHT have merit your strategy sucks.  Ruins any democratic branding.

            Answer this question.  How does Taylor dropping out improve the democratic brand in your state beyond this election.

            And if Orman gets elected as a moderate again how does this help the democratic brand.  And how does his election help the people of the state and nation.  Not that voting for anyone is a guarantee of that.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:19:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Your "purity" (8+ / 0-)

              would damage the Democratic Party, and the country.

              We need to hold the Senate. American families need us to hold the Senate and you would sacrifice that on the alter of what??

              I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
              but I fear we will remain Democrats.

              Who is twigg?

              by twigg on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:28:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Ah can't win the... (0+ / 0-)

                ..argument so trot out the empty rhetoric of 'you are just a purist unwilling to compromise'. Well why don't we just disband the Democratic Party then and call ourselves republicans.  Hey at least that way we can say we won and our people are elected to help the people.

                So let us help the Democratic Party by not running candidates when it seems too hard or we are going to loose.  Sheesh.

                We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:37:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Politics (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Quabbin, Maggiemad

                  is "the art of the possible", not some imagined "optic" that you dreamed up.

                  We need wins, and at this point any win is a good one. We don't Chair committees or set the agenda if we don't win.

                  You need to wake up to that unpleasant truth.

                  You are correct .... We don't run candidates when doing so would split the vote and allow the Republican to win .... period.

                  I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
                  but I fear we will remain Democrats.

                  Who is twigg?

                  by twigg on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:41:01 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Ok go ahead... (0+ / 0-)

                    ..ignore optics and branding.  Just don't be surprised when democrats are afforded third party status.  Or when Orman turns on you and votes for something reprehensible to maintain his 'Independent' standing.

                    Oh and by you logic all the republicans have to do to have democrats ceed the field is submit a moderate candidate to split the vote, which is done quite often.

                    Or when a republican candidate melts down and no democrat is on the ballot because we didn't try.

                    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                    by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 04:02:24 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Repugs have moderate candidates? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                    •  you really don't get it. (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      RNdaSilva, Maggiemad, acornweb

                      A democrat no matter what the circumstances is NOT going to beat the Republican candidate for senator.

                      Taylor knows by staying in the race, all he is doing assuring the Republican will win.

                      Taylor is doing what is best for Kansas and withdrawing to allow an ideological ally to have a clear shot at the Republican.

                      In states where the Democratic party is established and healthy, party labels are mandatory.

                      In places like Kansas or Texas a long road of rebuilding must be traveled before it can demand that of candidates who want Democratic party support.

                      In all too many ways the Democratic party in those states Already has functionally has 3rd party status it is so lacking in vitality and statewide party infrastructure.

                      During that time, lending support to an independent who is an ideological ally of Democrats in the state of Kansas helps build bridges to the independents in that state who currently would not dream of supporting a Democrat but would support an Independent.

                      By putting both on the same team for an election will build the connections essential to rebuilding the party.

                      During that time, it makes no sense at all to let Independents see Democrats as always their opponent especially when there is 0 chance of winning.

                      By stepping aside, Taylor allows the Democratic brand to be an ally of those independents, and in doing so help them realize that maybe they should be Democrats again since many of them were at one time prior to the successful demonization of the words Democrat and Liberal in those states.

                •  Face it; you're incompetent with strategy. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  twigg, Quabbin, RNdaSilva

                  Sometimes you lose a battle to win a war. That concept is clearly beyond you!

                  Change the charter of corporations to serve the public interest BEFORE fiduciary concerns. 100% of Republicans and HALF the Dems are AGAINST We The People. We need TRUE Progressives, NOT Republican-Lite Dems - like Hillary, Pelosi, Feinstein...

                  by RTIII on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 05:12:47 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Ok so tell me how you... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...think this will play out this election and beyond.

                    The best I see is Orman getting elected and constantly selling his loyalty to the highest bidder and the democrats not being able to effectively fight to remove him because he will always be splitting the vote.

                    If he looses and the republican gets elected again the democrats will again be hamstrung by the image of quitters rather than honorable fighters for their point of view.

                    Tell me how you see it playing out this election and beyond.

                    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                    by delver rootnose on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 05:21:12 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  You may not be a concern troll, (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  but you certainly sound like one. It's not Chad Taylor falling on his sword that will make the Democratic brand look bad. That will quickly be forgotten. It's only Kansas, after all.

                  It's the lack of leadership at the national level that is the problem. They need to collectively grow a spine. Until they do, we are all screwed.

                  Chad was sacrificed for the good of the whole country. Truly a better person than you are for taking anonymous pot shots at him.

                  •  Yea but this was orchestrated .... (0+ / 0-)

           Claire mccaskil from Missouri.  This was orchestrated by national democrats.  Why should Taylor be praised for acceding to their wishes.  So is this national democrats screwing us or having a spine.

                    Oh and it is only Kansas after all.  Sucks to be a Kansas democrat.  If I lived in Kansas why would I want to be a democrat if all I am ever good for is to be thrown under the bus for the supposed good of the spineless national democrats.  See what I mean about screwing the brand.

                    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                    by delver rootnose on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 12:27:23 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  And I see from a previous comment of yours.... (0+ / 0-)

             understand how bad it seems to be a democrat in Kansas as you are a registered republican.

                      We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                      by delver rootnose on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 01:53:31 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  It actually makes sense to be a registered (0+ / 0-)

                        Republican in Kansas if you're a Democrat.  

                        By doing so, Democrats get to vote in the Republican primary as RINOs and effect the outcome regarding who their Republican opponents will be in the fall election.  

                        It's worked many, many times.  Not so much for U.S. Senator, but certainly for many other offices.

                  •  Oh and next time.... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...before you criticize me for being a concern troll maybe you should write a few diaries and get maybe five thousand comments under you belt first.

                    And for someone who has been here a month and only has 12 comments you sure know the parlance well.

                    I don't know why I let you bait me.  It is almost like that was your intent.

                    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                    by delver rootnose on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 12:30:41 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Why does anyone have to "write a few diaries" (0+ / 0-)

                      or post a ton of comments before they can criticize the comments of someone else? After all, quantity simply does NOT mean...or refer to...or require quality.

                      And the poster you were replying to?  He did NOT criticize you for being a concern troll.  Rather, he SPECIFICALLY said "You may not be a concern troll, but you certainly sound like one."  And, frankly, that is how you have been coming across in many of your comments here.  Well, except when you make ad hominem attacks on folks.  Why on earth would people not think you're some sort of troll?

              •  The Concern Trolls are Out In Force Today. The ... (8+ / 0-)

                The Concern Trolls are Out In Force Today.

                The good news for Dems must be giving them a real sad.

            •  "...democratic brand..."? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Quabbin, NotYerX, Maggiemad

              I understand that there is a long run game in each election that must be focused on future elections. However, the objective of each election must also consider getting the best person elected out of those who reasonably can be elected. If the Democratic endorsed nominee cannot win, then the future election considerations must be weighed against the importance of not ceding this election to the wingnut. Each person can weight those considerations differently, but with control of the Senate in play, immediate results in this election are very, very important. That seems to me to make defeating today's wingnut trump future election considerations.

            •  Do you think Angus King (0+ / 0-)

              the independent senator from Maine has brought the Maine Democratic party low?

            •  It's not about the branding... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              it's about getting someone in office who actually wants to help Kansas families. We've had Robertson in office for WAY too long doing nothing and not even living in state! It's time for a change and this may be the only way to make it happen.

              Lawrence: 27 square miles of reality surrounded by Kansas

              by czarinakm on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 03:03:43 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And you trust... (0+ / 0-)

                ...Orman, a millionaire self funder to be that person?

                We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                by delver rootnose on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 03:07:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'd at least be willing (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  delver rootnose, Maggiemad

                  to give him a chance. I agree with more of his views than Roberts. (which I typo'd above as Robertson - wrong nut job)

                  In most states, subbing in an independent would probably be the wrong tactic. However, in the reddest of red states, it may be the only way to get the current regime out.

                  Ease into a change with someone sitting fairly square in the middle and see if we can push forward from there.

                  Lawrence: 27 square miles of reality surrounded by Kansas

                  by czarinakm on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 03:18:41 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  His populist campaign is why Nader wins so often (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Phoenix Woman, Quabbin

          Oh, wait.

          Instead of running a populist candidate and focusing on getting the huge group of people who don't vote because of disgust involved
          If you have some evidence that Elizabeth Warren would be a good candidate in Kansas, please share it.

          In a better world, the independent would have dropped out and the Democrat would win. But that's nothing close to what the polling was showing. (Sarah Palin's old gig in Juneau has the same story.)

          I suspect that there is an agreement the Independent will caucus with the Democrats. In that case, best of luck to him.

        •  A Quick Reply, (0+ / 0-)

          having been born in Kansas by two conservative republicans, I can assure you that there is no redder state than Kansas.  There is no such thing as an acceptable populist candidate there.  So why not try what the R's would have done if they were in the same position?

        •  Desperation is KKK (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Quabbin, Maggiemad

          Desperation is Kobach trying to create his own laws.  Whether what the democrat is doing is actually good political strategy is another story.  I think KKK's move smacks of even greater desperation.

          Are you really or "OH Really" a conservative trolling on this website?  Just asking, since it certainly sounds that way.

        •  Oh, rootnose, that one is too easy: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          What happens when the republicans run a competent candidate with abhorrent ideas.
          We get Rick Perry, Scott Walker, Chis Christie, Rick Snyder, McDonell and their ilk. All corrupt, all cheats, all liars. I would argue that they are "competent" even. They sure know how to look good with the help of their aides, at least until the ballots are counted.
          That they have novel ideas is not debatable, they do. The problem is that all their ideas are to enrich themselves and their cronies and bad for the country.  
          They seem to be experts at using the system to their private advantage, such as this Mr Cantor. They sure know how to land with a golden parachute, don't they.
          In the meantime, the rest of us get treated to the shaft!
        •  Youy are a left wing version of Rumsfeld (0+ / 0-)

          So many lefties think there is a groundswell of a populist sentiment just awaiting the right populist candidate. It is a myth. People aren't disgusted with politics because of where they sit on the political spectrum. They are disgusted because of the polarization and games playing.

          •  Ok so I'm now a troll, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            A paid shill and a Rumsfeld apologist.  Is that all you guys got.  But to the only minor point you made.  So this dropping out to help another candidate how do you think that will be perceived by people sick of polarization and gamesmanship huh.

            And frankly your assertion of the cause is as unsupported as mine. So there.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 03:14:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  It sounds like (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          all you've done in politics is to pick up right-wad media talking points.  desperation, lack of original ideas,  etc.

          Republickans have not had an original idea since Teddy Roosevelt, so why that phrase is in your lexicon is a bit mysterious.  

          •  Yea I know that... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ...but if you read my comments I was describing what the republicans would say as a counter argument not what I would use.  I would guess that is an accurate PORTRAIL of how a republican would answer.  You have to hope to know your opponents well enough to be able to anticipate their replies so you may plan your counter reply in advance.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 03:25:28 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  The short term matters (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Remember the 2000 election and an idealist named Ralph Nader? Nader's theory was that Gore and Bush were equally bad and that he had to run on principle.

          Had he put short term tactics ahead of long term goals Al Gore would have become President, the Iraq war would have been avoided, over 100,000 lives would have been saved, over a trillions dollars would have been saved, dozens of important judgeships would have gone to Democrats instead of Republicans, and the world would be a much different and far better place.

          You usually have to win a few battles to win a war. If that means you have to support an imperfect candidate instead of letting an extremist win by default then so be it.

          •  Well the BS about Nader... (0+ / 0-)

            Loossing it for Gore, who won if you actually count the votes and a man that didn't even win his home state notwithstanding, I just don't see why people can't see my point about how bad an image this presents.

            Let's put it this way.  You are canvassing door to door and come to a house of people you could influence, people who don't vote much and really don't pay attention, and you try to sell them, because that is what you are doing, on a democratic candidate or the Democratic Party and you start talking issues where the democrats are better for that person and he or she says 'Why should I believe you will stand up for me when you won't even stand up for yourself and run on those positions' or 'Why should I think you wouldn't give up on me just like you gave up on your campaign'.  How do you answer that person?

            Or you come upon a person who voted for Taylor but is not immersed in the inside baseball politicking this move represents.  How do you explain to them that the person they voted for, sometimes at risk to themselves in places like Kansas, dropped out and broke trust with them.  How long do you stand there explaining to them why their choice was wrong and they really should vote for the other guy.

            Or you come upon someone who says, and this has actually happened to me though not in Kansas, who says I am a democrat but I always pull a republican primary ballot because the democrats never win and I want to have some influence in who gets chosen.  How do you convince them to pull a democratic primary ballot, which is public record in many places for their employers to find, when the actions of the democrat is really the same thing?  Or as similar when they say they pull a republican ballot because there is no one running for most offices on the democratic ballot because they have already pre conceded the races.

            Oh and to get back to you Gore argument.  Gore's practical  reasonable lesser of evils choice of a running mate had more to do with his failure as a candidate than Nader did. Well that and Gore didn't even fight the BS ruling of the Supremes in congress like the constitution provides for and many, esp some in the black caucus, wanted him to.  But he couldn't do THAT it would be too divisive.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 07:35:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  No-one ever (0+ / 0-)

          emulates Republicans except other Republicans.

          •  Except for when ... (0+ / 0-)

            ..democrats do it to move to the right to seem more palitable to the supposed right of center middle independent voter.

            I am arguing we stop doing that and go more to the left, radical if we must, to move the center to the left.

            But that isn't what this remove the republican at all cost action is doing.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 07:51:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  dropping out to defeat the republican reeks (0+ / 0-)

          I think perhaps you're not seeing the bigger picture here.  It's not as simple as just voting in a Democrat vs a Republican. If we truly want to change America for the better we must elect those candidates who agree with our positions. Sometimes, those people may be I]Independents. Sometimes, at least in the past, they might even be Republicans. Arlen Spector comes to mind. Since the Independent is already ahead in the polls, it makes sense to put him head to head with the asshat.  Do you remember what happened in Florida in 2000, when Ralph Nader, bless his heart, siphoned off votes that would have otherwise gone to Al Gore?  There are a substantial number of people who will always vote party first, straight down the ticket, siphoning off votes for the more viable opponent of the asshat.  Asshat wins. It's really about policies we want, laws we want, change we want. So yes, have the Dem drop out. Let the Independent with similar leanings win against the asshat.

          When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross - (Sinclair Lewis)----------- It can't happen here is number one on the list of famous last words -(David Crosby)

          by Coaster Freak on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 09:29:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Please stop it with the Nader caused Gore to .... (0+ / 0-)

            ...loose BS.  It has been proven BS, as in Gore won Florida, and it was Gore's own own choice of Lieberman who lost it for Gore.

            But beyond that you don't even see the silliness of your argument.  What is going on in Kansas is like if Gore dropped out and supported Nader, the independent in that race.

            Additionally your argument about people voting party line weakens your argument that by making it less likly that Orman will win.

            It also assumes we know where Orman stands on issues.  What I have seen of him he seems willing to sell his support to either side.  At least with Taylor we can expect him to hue to party line or be held accountable when he doesn't.  What do we judge Orman against.

            But I have come to the conclusion that tricksy gaming to supposedly win the seat is all that matters.  Short term thinking to win the day.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 09:47:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Reeks of desperation and cowardice? (0+ / 0-)

          Is your post about voter ID?  Voter ID is desperation and egregious treason.  It attacks the life blood of liberty, the right to vote.   The republican voter fraud fairy tale scam is the worst excuse ever in the history of politics and the people who are trying their best to promote it are the lowest form of scum in the entire political cesspool.

    •  Um, this likely isn't going to stand (28+ / 0-)

      Kobach's move is nakedly partisan and will probably be overturned in the courts. The Senate seat is still very much in play. (For proof of that, look at the RNC going in guns-blazing to save Roberts' campaign, or lack thereof).

      One action by one clown and you instantly throw in in the towel. Sheesh, some people here...

    •  What? (23+ / 0-)

      The Dem was never going to win, not in a two-way race with Roberts, not in a three-way race. We have lost nothing. And we've gained a better shot at the governor's mansion and Orman might caucus with Democrats.

      I ride the wild horse .

      by BelgianBastard on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 02:18:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right. In politics you have to be flexible and (9+ / 0-)

        often choose the lesser of two evils.  Orman SEEMS (and that's all we ever have to go on) like a guy who will be better than Roberts.  And Kobach is busy committing suicide as far as his own campaign is concerned.  He's also giving great free publicity to the fact that the Dem. has filed to be taken off the ballot.  The courts will probably overturn Kobach's idiocy anyway, but if they don't, everyone will know Orman is the only real opposition to Pat Roberts who is already as popular as ants at a picnic with an approval rating of 27%!
        If Orman wins, I'm guessing he'll caucus with Democrats and vote for Reid for Leader.  Of course, Republicans will offer him a leadership position, but so might Dems.  It's going to be interesting.

        Putting the fun back in dysfunctional.

        by hawkseye on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:00:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  In voting, you only get the lesser of two evils (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BelgianBastard, Quabbin

          ... because unless we change our voting system (first-past-the-post), that's a cardinal rule.

          So you either work to get one of those two choices to be less evil for you, or you sabotage yourself by fielding a third candidate that is guaranteed to lose.

          You want different? Work to change the voting system.  

          Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting

          by sacrelicious on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:40:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, but proportional representation... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kd4dean, hawkseye, Phoenix Woman

            has it's own problems.

            In Belgium we have 12 parties in the federal parliament despite a party needing a minimum of 5% of votes to win any seats. The result is it takes forever to form a government (we voted at the end of May, still no government).

            I ride the wild horse .

            by BelgianBastard on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:48:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  We haven't had a government (4+ / 0-)

              since sometime in 2009.

              To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

              by sneakers563 on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 04:12:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Proportional voting is just one alternative (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              IRV [1] or the more complicated but less game-able Condorcet [2] method are considered more resilient choices to direct Preference voting [3].

              Also of note, the actual electoral system [4] in Belgium sounds very particular - 3 electoral colleges?  We have trouble with just one here in the USA.

              Electoral system

              Preference voting
              Proportional representation on the basis of four constituencies (Flanders, Wallonia, the German-speaking region and the Brussels region) and three electoral colleges.
              12 Members will be elected by the Dutch-speaking electoral college(Flanders and Brussels)
              8 Members by the French-speaking college (Wallonia + Brussels),
              1 Member by the German-speaking college.
              In 2014, 21 Members will be elected for the European Parliament.

              Also, IMHO Condorcet was a true bad-ass, the Nikolai Tesla of electoral math.


              Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting

              by sacrelicious on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 11:12:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Those are the elections to the (0+ / 0-)

                European parliament.

                The Federal parliament has a different system. The Senate used to have a different system from that, but the changed it to the same to screw a particular politician. And then there are the six  'deelstaten' which are unique in the world because their territories overlap. You have three communities (Dutch/French/German speaking) and three regions (Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels, the latter being bilingual). The Dutch-speaking community and Flanders have merged their parliaments, and it just gets more complicated from there.

                I would consider doing a diary about it, but I might accidently kill one of the few readers with boredom...

                I ride the wild horse .

                by BelgianBastard on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 12:37:15 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Go read this morning's DK Poll Explorer (9+ / 0-)


      Then explain why the chances of Republicans gaining the majority in the Senate just dropped by...what-20 points, if I recall correctly?

      Taylor dropping out made that shift possible.  Kobach attempting to force his name to stay on the ballot reveals more about Republican desperation than Taylor's retirement from the race reveals about Democratic desperation.

      To the left, to the left....

      by CWinebrinner on Thu Sep 04, 2014 at 03:09:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Um, NOT nationally insignificant. Kris Kobach (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ahianne, poleshifter, Phoenix Woman

      wrote Arizona's "papers please" anti-immigration law, Alabama's law, too.  He is national conservative darling.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site