Why doesn't the gop run better candidates?

[HarleyDog]

(07-29-2023, 02:10 AM)pally Wrote: There are plenty of things we can do to improve the quality of people running.  It won’t happen over night if at all unfortunately as Republicans and Democrats still write the voting rules for everybody.

1) end political gerrymandering, the outcome of far too many elections are foretold simply by knowing what district someone runs in.  Gerrymandering leads to extremist candidates being enshrined into office…on both sides. Its 2023 for goodness sakes all districts should be drawn by computer
2) non party voters should not be locked out of preliminary elections.  The wider the voting pool, the less extreme the candidate
3) better yet do away with party specific “nominating” primary elections.  Go to jungle style balloting with all candidates on a single ballot.  Top 2 go to the general election as a runoff unless 1 candidate gets over 50%
4) ranked choice voting
5) don’t put party affiliations on the ballots
6) loosen the rules for 3rd party candidates to get on the ballots

Bad people make bad leaders and generally in the long run make bad policy

Is 2 a thing? Not sure I understand 4.

[GMDino]

(07-29-2023, 03:16 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Is 2 a thing? Not sure I understand 4.

In PA if you are a registered to a party that is the only party you can vote for in the primaries.

Matt can explain #4 better than most of us.

Alaska is currently using it.

https://www.elections.alaska.gov/RCV.php

You will be stunned to find that the gop mostly objects to it. 

My google AI search result threw out these stats:

Quote:[color=var(--mc5)]Generative AI is experimental. Info quality may vary.[/color]


[color=var(--mc5)]
[color=var(--mc5)]Ranked choice voting (RCV) is a voting method that allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference. In a survey, 61% of voters favored using RCV in general federal elections, including 73% of Democrats and 55% of independents. Republicans were divided, with 49% in favor and 50% opposed.[/color][/color]
[color=var(--mc5)][color=var(--mc5)]
The Virginia, Utah, and Indiana Republican parties use RCV in state conventions and primaries. RCV ballots are also used by overseas voters in six states as a contingency in the case of a runoff election. Many credit Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin's win in Virginia to the fact that his party used a ranked-choice voting system in its closed nomination process.[/color][/color]

[HarleyDog]

(07-29-2023, 04:43 PM)GMDino Wrote: In PA if you are a registered to a party that is the only party you can vote for in the primaries.

Matt can explain #4 better than most of us.

Alaska is currently using it.

https://www.elections.alaska.gov/RCV.php

You will be stunned to find that the gop mostly objects to it. 

My google AI search result threw out these stats:

Ok, I misunderstood 2. I somewhat understand why it might be done, but disagree with it.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(07-28-2023, 12:19 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm intrigued you think DeSantis has a shot, much less a landslide win over Trump in him.  That seems like an emotion based statement. 

Both are terrible candidates I won't ever vote for, but I am curious to see which Ohio will go for in the primary. Trump got crushed in Ohio in his only primary election here. 


As to the OP, I have been wondering this about both parties for years now. How can we have 330 million people and it comes down to Biden and Trump... again? Wonder if Bernie shows up as a dark horse for the Democrats, though I don't think a sitting President has ever lost a primary?

[*pally*]

(07-29-2023, 10:48 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Both are terrible candidates I won't ever vote for, but I am curious to see which Ohio will go for in the primary. Trump got crushed in Ohio in his only primary election here. 


As to the OP, I have been wondering this about both parties for years now. How can we have 330 million people and it comes down to Biden and Trump... again? Wonder if Bernie shows up as a dark horse for the Democrats, though I don't think a sitting President has ever lost a primary?

Bernie has already said he wasn’t running

[Dill]

(07-29-2023, 12:10 PM)M.W. Wrote: This is so true.  I wouldn't be surprised if trump wins the republican primary from prison (where he belongs). This is laughable, the man who literally tried to destroy democracy in the USA is the clear choice of the GOP. I believe the base is just hateful and they like how hateful and criminal trump is, if Desantis wants to become more popular with the base he should rape a child or maybe shoot a person with darker skin. 

The bolded certainly seems in evidence during Trump rallies.

But I think a lot of Trump supporters have been sucked into the Fox vortex,

so that they genuinely believe Biden is just as bad and Trump was good for the economy and made the U.S. "respected"--by praising dictators and sounding like one, and dissing our allies. ,

And they don't see a coup attempt coordinated with RNC operatives in 7 states plus the WH staff.
They see "peacefully" and free speech.

[Dill]

(07-28-2023, 02:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: I can understand looking past some personal flaw or past mistake but let's use Trump who had a well publicized history of not only bad behavior but literally ripping people off.  Running scams, etc.

If he runs scams on other people, though, what's the problem?  Besides that was in the past.

I don't believe he would deliberately scam the entire country just to stay in office,

and then promise vengeance on those who tried to stop him. 

Or at least I don't if a Trump win would help my 401k.

[Dill]

(07-29-2023, 02:10 AM)pally Wrote: There are plenty of things we can do to improve the quality of people running.  It won’t happen over night if at all unfortunately as Republicans and Democrats still write the voting rules for everybody.

1) end political gerrymandering, the outcome of far too many elections are foretold simply by knowing what district someone runs in.  Gerrymandering leads to extremist candidates being enshrined into office…on both sides. Its 2023 for goodness sakes all districts should be drawn by computer
2) non party voters should not be locked out of preliminary elections.  The wider the voting pool, the less extreme the candidate
3) better yet do away with party specific “nominating” primary elections.  Go to jungle style balloting with all candidates on a single ballot.  Top 2 go to the general election as a runoff unless 1 candidate gets over 50%
4) ranked choice voting
5) don’t put party affiliations on the ballots
6) loosen the rules for 3rd party candidates to get on the ballots

Bad people make bad leaders and generally in the long run make bad policy

Just some feedback: 

With you on everything but 5, so long as party still matters in the legislature.

Many people have been trying to end gerrymandering, but it is difficult. 

Ranked choice would also help reduce extreme candidates at the top of the ticket (but not down ballot) 
and make people feel their votes counted. 

It would elevate 3rd parties too. 

(07-29-2023, 02:10 AM)pally Wrote: Bad people make bad leaders and generally in the long run make bad policy

Everyone agrees with this. They just disagree on who is a "bad" leader. 

Sometimes they don't agree on what "bad" means, but often they do 
and then the only option is to make the other side's candidate just as bad. 

E.g., part of a "crime family." 

[samhain]

(07-28-2023, 11:56 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is actually a decent topic, as the GOP should have easily picked up the PA and GA seats.  GA because Georgia is still a red state and PA because Fetterman was a god awful candidate.  Sadly, no one to the right of Mao is going to think the actual intent of this thread is to have an honest discussion on the topic.

I think it's a fascinating discussion as well and speaks to the impact populism can have on our electoral system.  

My godfather, much like you is a Republican living in exile on the West Coast.  He's 81, a retired Naval pilot and has lived all over the world.  When I want a grounded answer about something political, he's the dude I ask.  Half Moon Bay Area.  He's a very tolerant guy, but he's also very quick to vocalize his disdain for just about any non-social liberal thinking.  I asked him about Trump early, and he was unworried.  He thought Trump's main goal was to reign in immigration and that he and Sessions at the time would have their hands full enough fulfilling that campaign "promise" to do any real damage otherwise.  Now, he does not like Trump as a person, but he's going to vote for him 100 percent of the time vs any Democrat, no questions asked.

Last year I picked his brain about Trump.  He got kind of quiet and frustrated.  He told me that he honestly hated Trump, but would vote for him again, as said.  I asked why and he told me that he hated Trump because his rise to power all but guaranteed that he'd never see another Republican president in his lifetime.  

Presidential candidates/presidents become defacto party leaders regularly.  DJT is no different in that.  Where he does differ is in the psychological grip he has on a huge portion of the GOP base.  Party elders no longer matter as long as he's the most visible and popular figure in the party.  Strategy means nothing because if it's not his strategy it's not happening.  You can't circumvent him because he will certainly turn the base against you.  Even if you best him in a primary, which you won't, he'll kill whatever candidate succeeds him on social media as long as he sees fit.  He's the most savage and feral campaigner in the history of this country, therefore opposing him is borderline political suicide.  

It's a really interesting thing to watch.  I agree that both of those seats would likely gone red under a normal GOP leadership scenario.  Trump handpicked celebrities such as Walker and Oz (also a carpetbagger), and to a lesser extent Lake.  It's what he knows.  It backfired badly.  There's no way a McConnell run party picks those people.  DeSantis, just for a random example, probably has better instincts than that as well.  The people pumping in campaign money definitely do.  

Trump's presidency broke a lot of cycles, not all beneficial to his party.  Midterms are a glaring example.  The party can abandon him at their own peril, but they most definitely can not abandon his base.  

[GMDino]

I can't understand why anyone would support the gop while they allow this guy to stay in office.

George Santos:

“A lot of people have those insecurities. Actually, studies point that most people lie on their resumes.”

Good Day New York host: “Yeah, but you lied about everything…You lied about your mom.” pic.twitter.com/t3iuDRBvns

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) August 18, 2023

 



There isn't ONE person they can run for that seat that isn't a complete liar?

[hollodero]

(08-19-2023, 10:16 AM)GMDino Wrote: I can't understand why anyone would support the gop while they allow this guy to stay in office.

What else is an ideologically conservative person supposed to do.

[GMDino]

(08-19-2023, 10:20 AM)hollodero Wrote: What else is an ideologically conservative person supposed to do.

If they were an honest person they would demand their party run a better candidate or not vote at all.

But, again, I realize asking for integrity is often too high a bar in politics.  From both the candidate and the voter.

In this case though the party and the HOR has continually backed him staying in office when he is a complete and proven liar.

[hollodero]

(08-19-2023, 10:27 AM)GMDino Wrote: If they were an honest person they would demand their party run a better candidate or not vote at all.

I don't know how one effectively demands a better candidate, except for primaries that already passed. Not voting resembles handing the liberal candidate the win. And most ideological conservatives might find this to be the worse outcome still. Not that I feel that way, but I can not really fault people for going with their lesser evil, even if said lesser evil is a rididulous liar.

I blame the system, not the voter stuck with it.

(08-19-2023, 10:27 AM)GMDino Wrote: But, again, I realize asking for integrity is often too high a bar in politics.  From both the candidate and the voter.

From the parties and candidates, mostly. I mean, I'd guess there are many blue districts where team blue could run a toddler and still win as well. And it would be the same issue, what else to do, vote for the Trump loving alternative?

[GMDino]

(08-19-2023, 10:35 AM)hollodero Wrote: I don't know how one effectively demands a better candidate, except for primaries that already passed. Not voting resembles handing the liberal candidate the win. And most ideological conservatives might find this to be the worse outcome still. Not that I feel that way, but I can not really fault people for going with their lesser evil, even if said lesser evil is a rididulous liar.

I blame the system, not the voter stuck with it.



From the parties and candidates, mostly. I mean, I'd guess there are many blue districts where team blue could run a toddler and still win as well. And it would be the same issue, what else to do, vote for the Trump loving alternative?

I'm a Democrat but if I see a Democrat that I know is no good I won't vote for him.

We have a local guy who has won in the past and then once he finally lost because of his behavior he kept running...and losing.  People know he's an idiot so they don't vote for him.  

Yes the system allows this to happen but in the case of Santos there is also something in the system that allows him to have been removed.  The gop refuses to do it and as a voter in that district I'd be pissed.  Unless of course its all about the R and D and not about the truth and trying to get good people into office.

And I know that I often lament that people (voters/candidates/party leaders) aren't better people and that they should be, with the full understanding that it's a pipe dream.

[hollodero]

(08-19-2023, 10:40 AM)GMDino Wrote: Unless of course its all about the R and D and not about the truth and trying to get good people into office.

Well, for most people it is and I can not blame them.

What if liberals ran someone like Santos for president and the alternative candidate is Donald Trump. Would you abstain or still vote for the liar? For I probably would feel quite inclined to do the latter still, just to prevent something.

[GMDino]

(08-19-2023, 10:47 AM)hollodero Wrote: Well, for most people it is and I can not blame them.

What if liberals ran someone like Santos for president and the alternative candidate is Donald Trump. Would you abstain or still vote for the liar? For I probably would feel quite inclined to do the latter still, just to prevent something.

If it was someone as clearly bad as Santos...a proven liar on all accounts...I would NOT vote for either, knowing that may mean Trump would win.  And that's given the Trump is nearly has bad as Santos on the lying front and worse on everything else.

Santos is the official poster boy of awful, lying candidates.  He should be removed from office.

I do it for local and state elections and I would do it for a national election also.

I don't pull the "D" lever...I vote my conscince.  More voters should too, IMHO.

[hollodero]

(08-19-2023, 10:53 AM)GMDino Wrote: I don't pull the "D" lever...I vote my conscince.  More voters should too, IMHO.

My conscience would allow to go for the Santos kind liar over the Trump like authoritarian. As you said, the latter's worse on most other fronts still, so I would know what outcome to prefer. 

Not to mention there's also still just ideology. You want good people in office no matter R or D, but that will not fly for many. Someone of a certain opposing ideology is just not a good candidate for most people. If one does not want liberal policies, the liberal candidate might be a wonderful and integer person, but conservatives still will prefer the policies of the conservative douchebag that runs against him. Imho understandable.

Just to be clear, that is not directed in any way against your stance. I agree in theory and in a happy world. But as far as things stand... I am willing to cut conservative voters some slack for voting their beliefs.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-19-2023, 11:12 AM)hollodero Wrote: My conscience would allow to go for the Santos kind liar over the Trump like authoritarian. As you said, the latter's worse on most other fronts still, so I would know what outcome to prefer. 

Not to mention there's also still just ideology. You want good people in office no matter R or D, but that will not fly for many. Someone of a certain opposing ideology is just not a good candidate for most people. If one does not want liberal policies, the liberal candidate might be a wonderful and integer person, but conservatives still will prefer the policies of the conservative douchebag that runs against him. Imho understandable.

Just to be clear, that is not directed in any way against your stance. I agree in theory and in a happy world. But as far as things stand... I am willing to cut conservative voters some slack for voting their beliefs.

For most voters in most elections it's usually voting for the lesser of two evils.  It often boils down to which candidate agrees with you on the issues you find most important.  Given the ideological split in this country, and the hard lines in the sand on most issues, that effectively means most people are voting along party lines.

[hollodero]

(08-19-2023, 11:26 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: For most voters in most elections it's usually voting for the lesser of two evils.  It often boils down to which candidate agrees with you on the issues you find most important.  Given the ideological split in this country, and the hard lines in the sand on most issues, that effectively means most people are voting along party lines.

Yeah, and so would I. I find climate change (and then some) an important topic, and whoever does not agree does not get my vote, and if it were a saint.

This all is more reason to believe a two-party system... but yeah, that's turning into my ceterum censeo topic. But it's true. What avoids people like Santos is a non-liberal alternative to Santos.

Btw. Austria just indicted our former chancellor. It can be done :)

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2023, 10:27 AM)GMDino Wrote: If they were an honest person they would demand their party run a better candidate or not vote at all.

But, again, I realize asking for integrity is often too high a bar in politics.  From both the candidate and the voter.

In this case though the party and the HOR has continually backed him staying in office when he is a complete and proven liar.

I stopped voting Democrat after 08 and you're giving me an 82 year old Joe Biden, damn it.