BBC: Biden tries to rig the presidential primaries

[RichA]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

[trotsky]

On 12/2/22 6:26 PM, RichA wrote:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311


Are you saying that if he really wants to rig the election he should
appeal to the Russian troll farms like Trump and his cronies did?

[BTR1701]

In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
they behave like this.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

[suzeeq]

But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.

[trotsky]

On 12/4/22 11:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> residents.

Excellent, more Oath Keeper talking points. Meanwhile;

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/jun/18/whether-wisconsin-most-gerrymandered-state/

On whether Wisconsin is the most gerrymandered state


Hint: it's not Dems doing the gerrymandering. I know you're lack of
testicles won't allow you a rebuttal though. Maybe some guy with a
working pair can stand in for you?

Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> they behave like this.
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

Fuck off, eunuch.

[trotsky]

The dickless wonder doesn't give a shit.

[BTR1701]

The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which is what
Biden is 'adjusting'.

[suzeeq]

So, what's wrong with that?

[BTR1701]

When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
don't think that's racist?

If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
people, would that be cool?

[suzeeq]

On 12/4/2022 12:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1...@solani.org>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>>>
>>>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>>> they behave like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>>>
>>>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>>>
>>> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>>> is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>>>
>> So, what's wrong with that?
>
> When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
> don't think that's racist?

Not really.

>
> If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
> one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
> people, would that be cool?
>

Not the same thing.

They're still getting to vote in the primary, just IA won't get bragging
rights for being first.

[Adam H. Kerman]

BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>they behave like this.

>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.

They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
ads in the Number 3 television market.

[RichA]

On Friday, 2 December 2022 at 19:26:44 UTC-5, RichA wrote:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

Anyone know about this initiative?

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/new-reconstruction-constitution-democracy.html

[RichA]

The Democrats want the tone set to avoid that. If they could, it would be New York they'd pick.

[BTR1701]

Always the response when the double standard rears its ugly head.

[A Friend]

In article <tmj12j$3o6ne$3...@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman

<a...@chinet.com> wrote:

> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
> >The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> >residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> >they behave like this.
>
> >https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
> That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
> that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
> time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.

I submit the example of Nixon's people in 1972. There was no way Nixon
was going to lose that election. None, and yet Nixon's evil minions
did what they did anyway.

> They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
> population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
> a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
> first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
> ads in the Number 3 television market.

Concise and accurate. This reshuffle has nothing to do with fairness
or representation. Yeah, Iowans are mostly white -- they got them on
that, all righty -- but they pay close attention to what's going on
around them. They're also good at eliminating dumbass candidates who
have no chance at the nomination. (Does anybody seriously think Biden
is vulnerable?)

South Carolina reflects South Carolina. The idea that South Carolina
is representative of minorities generally is pretty damn racist.

[suzeeq]

I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
PAC money usually win out.

[Adam H. Kerman]

If there were to be a national primary, then nomination by convention
would be dropped. The problem is that the only candidates who could
participate are those with the cash for tv ads nationwide.

Starting with small states, you start with a lower-budget political
campaign and try to prove you have a following with "retail" politics,
not television advertising.

That's the theory, at least.

[shawn]

If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
primaries then I don't see the problem. The states that got the
primaries were arbitrarily picked so what's the problem with making
another arbitrary decision to switch the states that get the first
primaries.

[shawn]

Given that the leaders seem to change over time I'm not so sure that
theory works out in fact. Though I don't think starting with the
largest states first would change anything. It's the extended time for
primaries that gives time for the leaders to alternate as some
candidates prove themselves better able to connect with the voters.

[moviePig]

Meanwhile, there's the question of why we'd *want* the earliest
primaries to "represent the nation". Don't we hate spoilers?

[BTR1701]

In article <4u5qoh15e0r2pd3oh...@4ax.com>,

Every state has a primary.

[suzeeq]

Hmmm. I still think it's riduculous to have a nearly year long campaign.

[Adam H. Kerman]

shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 12:04:35 -0800, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1...@solani.org>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> > On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> >>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> >>> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>> >>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>> >>> they behave like this.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>> >>>
>>> >> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>>> >
>>> > The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>>> > is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>>> >
>>> So, what's wrong with that?
>>
>>When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
>>don't think that's racist?
>>
>>If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>>one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>>people, would that be cool?
>
>If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
>primaries then I don't see the problem.

That claim has been discredited.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Iowa, the state we are discussing, doesn't have a presidential primary,
nor does Nevada.

[Adam H. Kerman]

You don't know what you are talking about and you are simply ignoring
what I've been saying. It's easy enough to check how much money various
presidential campaigns had raised prior to any of the early caucuses and
primaries. You can tell right off which ones could have bought significant
and sustainable television advertising.

How could a presidential campaign possibly raise big money not yet
having demonstrated that it's appealing to party voters?

>It's the extended time for primaries that gives time for the leaders
>to alternate as some candidates prove themselves better able to connect
>with the voters.

Yeah? In a state with major television markets, you don't connect with
voters in gatherings of just a few dozen people. You must buy television
advertising. There are simply way too many people to reach in person.

[A Friend]

In article <tmj4v5$3oofh$1...@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman

Sure. The months-long trudge to the nomination is more of a winnowing
than anything else. It's valuable, too. In 1972, Ed Muskie looked to
be the sure nominee, but he was a mental case. The whole press corps
knew it.

[The Horny Goat]

Pardon me for being a dumb Canuck but aren't there something like 4
Latinos for every black person in the United States?

Your point about the cost of TV ads is well taken :)

[The Horny Goat]

But how is that different from any other state? Surely he doesn't
expect Iowa Democrats to vote in the GOP primary?

[The Horny Goat]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 13:33:38 -0800, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:

>> > If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>> > one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>> > people, would that be cool?
>> >
>> Not the same thing.
>
>Always the response when the double standard rears its ugly head.
>
>> They're still getting to vote in the primary, just IA won't get bragging
>> rights for being first.

Of course it's the same thing - if it said "Hispanic" or "Asian"
instead of white don't you think there would be screaming???

[The Horny Goat]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 14:22:56 -0800, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:

>> If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
>> primaries then I don't see the problem. The states that got the
>> primaries were arbitrarily picked
>
>Every state has a primary.

As opposed to those who have caucases?

[BTR1701]

A distinction without a difference. If Iowa didn't have a nominating process,
it wouldn't be being discussed.

[Adam H. Kerman]

The distinction is important. It's what's allowed Iowa to go ahead of
New Hampshire, which by state law is the first primary in each cycle.

Caucuses give everybody a headache 'cuz it's never clear how anybody did
till much much later.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Biden got pissed because they didn't show him enough love in 2020.

[Rhino]

I've heard it said many times that the campaign starts right after
Election Day....

--
Rhino

[Adam H. Kerman]

The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:

>Pardon me for being a dumb Canuck but aren't there something like 4
>Latinos for every black person in the United States?

With a quick Goog, there are 48 million Latino citizens and 60 million
total. 47 million blacks

Both are from the Pew Research Center, 2018 statistics

>. . .

[BTR1701]

How does New Hampshire law bind Iowa in any way?

[shawn]

On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 17:17:44 -0500, moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com>
wrote:

I don't think it would be spoilers for the voters but it could spoil
the plans of some campaigns. They could quickly see what messages
aren't working with the vast array of voters and decide to change
tactics. It's something they already do but could be forced to do so
much earlier. Though if they are being seen pushing a message that is
meant to help garner votes from the Latinos, Blacks and other persons
of color then that might make it harder to win over some in states
without significant minority populations.

[shawn]

Sorry, left out the early part of the sentence. As in "The states that
got the early primaries were arbitrarily picked." So there's no reason
why we have to stick with the same states coming first forever more.

[Jack]

On 04 Dec 2022, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> posted some
news:3prqoh5486d90r7l8...@4ax.com:

If you don't have a full time job and own property you shouldn't be
permitted to vote.

You are a parasite on the backs of everyone else until you get off your
ass and work for a living. Until you do, you have no voice influencing
the direction of others.

[suzeeq]

It certainly did right after the midterm election this year.

[suzeeq]

It precludes any other state having a primary before NH.

[BTR1701]

Again, how? How does the New Hampshire legislature have authority over
what happens in Iowa (or any other state)?

[Adam H. Kerman]

New Hampshire law determines the date of the first primary in the nation
relative to any other early state primary. New Hampshire law literally
mandates first primary in the nation.

If Iowa switched from a caucus to primary but kept it in January, then New
Hampshire would automatically move up its primary to be ahead of Iowa,
even if it means December.

If two states had a first primary in the nation law on their books, who
the hell knows which one would back off.

[Adam H. Kerman]

No, it can't do that. It automatically moves up its own primary to be
ahead of any other early state's primary.

[shawn]

It doesn't. It's a silly law based on the hope that no other state
would also want to be first in the nation to hold their primary.
Otherwise we could see them constantly moving their primary dates
until the primaries start right after the previous election.

[Adam H. Kerman]

The two political parties cannot dictate state law. All they can do is
refuse to seat delegates if state law fails to reflect the party's
calendar. It's happened a number of times, but you know what? The
delegates get seated anyway because the primary fight ended a month or
so before the convention and no one cares anymore about these pain in
the ass very early primaries.

[trotsky]

Well anonyshitted and right wing assholed.

[trotsky]

On 12/4/22 12:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>
>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>> they behave like this.
>>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>
>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>
> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which is what
> Biden is 'adjusting'.

But you only say this because you don't have the fucking balls to
discuss how GQPs rig the elections.

[trotsky]

On 12/4/22 3:20 PM, RichA wrote:

> On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 12:49:39 UTC-5, suzeeq wrote:
>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>
>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>> they behave like this.
>>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>
>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>

> The Democrats want the tone set to avoid that. If they could, it would be New York they'd pick.



How many "Democrats" have you spoken with up there in Canada?

[moviePig]

That seems plausible ...and, unfortunately, I hear nothing in it that
favors the selection of a more able future occupant of the oval office.
Instead we get (and likely deserve) a tournament of tweaked mythologies.

[trotsky]

On 12/4/22 4:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <4u5qoh15e0r2pd3oh...@4ax.com>,

> Every state has a primary.

Thank you Capt. Obvious.

[kensi]

On 2022-12-04 3:04 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1...@solani.org>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>>>
>>>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>>> they behave like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>>>
>>>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>>>
>>> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>>> is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>>>
>> So, what's wrong with that?
>
> When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
> don't think that's racist?

No, for two independent reasons each sufficient of itself:

1. White people are not structurally disadvantaged; quite the opposite.
2. Moving the early primaries toward being more demographically
representative of the US as a whole is the opposite of racism: it is
an attempt at increasing the overall fairness of the process.

> If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
> one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
> people, would that be cool?

No, because black people *are* structurally disadvantaged, and it would
almost certainly be moving *away* from being representative of the US as
a whole.

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate

[kensi]

On Mon, 05 Dec 2022 04:35:23 +0000, Jack wrote:
> If you don't have a full time job and own property you shouldn't be
> permitted to vote.

1855 is calling on line three. They say they want their troglodyte back.

> You are a parasite on the backs of everyone else until you get off your
> ass and work for a living.

Fuck off. Lots of people are jobless through no fault of their own:
disability, old age, the capitalists fucked up and cratered the economy
again, things like that. And nobody who isn't rich can afford to buy land
these days!

If you're looking for parasites on the backs of everyone else, I'll refer
you to the rich fuckers who got fat off everyone else's labor while never
beading so much as one drop of sweat on their own brows.

[trotsky]

Yes but Eunuch Derp is anatomically disadvantaged which prevents him
from discussing the truth.

[BTR1701]

On Dec 4, 2022 at 10:47:09 PM PST, "shawn" <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
wrote:

Also wondering why the Democrats believe they get to conclusively decide this
in the first place. At best they only have the authority to decide what order
the Democrat primaries occur. They have no ability to make these decisions for
Republicans. If the Republicans want to keep it as is, then you're going to
have a Republican primary in Iowa and a Democrat primary somewhere else.

[A Friend]

In article <SaudnS-P8pZaGxL-...@giganews.com>, BTR1701

NH is not telling IA or anyone else when to hold its primary. NH is
saying that it'll keep moving its own primary forward so that it comes
before any and all others.

I think it was shawn who said this is silly. He's right. Also, two
separate primaries in NH would increase the load on taxpayers. I don't
know why taxpayers are required to pay for party primaries, but here we
are, and so the expense should not be unnecessarily increased.

[suzeeq]

Caucuses both parties, not primaries.

[BTR1701]

Whatever. A distinction without a difference with regard to this issue.

[The Horny Goat]

Not sure what you mean by your Latino count.

As for blacks that was me having a "blond moment" since the percentage
of blacks in the US has been roughly 13% +/- 1% pretty much forever
and I was remembering the percentage and forgetting what it was a
percentage >OF< - doh!

[The Horny Goat]

On Mon, 05 Dec 2022 00:19:26 +0000, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:

>>> Every state has a primary.
>>
>> Iowa, the state we are discussing, doesn't have a presidential primary,
>> nor does Nevada.
>
>A distinction without a difference. If Iowa didn't have a nominating process,
>it wouldn't be being discussed.
>

The point was of course that not every state party uses primary
elections to select delegates and not all states bind their delegates
completely tightly to their candidate - many do so only for the first
convention ballot.

[The Horny Goat]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 23:12:48 -0500, shawn
<nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

>I don't think it would be spoilers for the voters but it could spoil
>the plans of some campaigns. They could quickly see what messages
>aren't working with the vast array of voters and decide to change
>tactics. It's something they already do but could be forced to do so
>much earlier. Though if they are being seen pushing a message that is
>meant to help garner votes from the Latinos, Blacks and other persons
>of color then that might make it harder to win over some in states
>without significant minority populations.

AND to fund raise. Never ever forget that.

Perhaps I'm being too cynical but I think not.

[The Horny Goat]

Logically that makes no sense at all since if more than one state
passes such a law the first primary of the next cycle will be January
21, 2025 (note the next inauguration day is slated for Jan 20, 2025)

Where there are likely to be NO declared candidates - hey you may be
on to something!!!

[Adam H. Kerman]

The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:

>Mon, 5 Dec 2022 01:54:46 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com>:

>>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:

>>>Pardon me for being a dumb Canuck but aren't there something like 4
>>>Latinos for every black person in the United States?

>>With a quick Goog, there are 48 million Latino citizens and 60 million
>>total. 47 million blacks

>>Both are from the Pew Research Center, 2018 statistics

>>>. . .

>Not sure what you mean by your Latino count.

The total Latino population included citizens and foreign nationals who
have immigrated to the United States (whether legally or not). Those who
are not citizens do not vote.

[trotsky]

Also wondering what the BBC actually said about 'Biden rigging the
primaries.'

[Ubiquitous]

Last time I checked, they've been making the primaries earlier every cycle.

[Kerman's incorrect formatting fixed.]

--
Let's go Brandon!