- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Jim Clyburn Says Requiring Black Candidates to Win 50% Dilutes the Black Vote
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:30 am
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:30 am
quote:
U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC6) has the unfortunate affliction of speech. In a recent article in The State newspaper, the 73 year old, seven-term congressman claims there are “barriers” in South Carolina that prevent black candidates from winning statewide office;
One of them, he said, is the state law that requires a candidate to win 50 percent plus one of the votes cast in a primary election. Often, that requirement forces black candidates into runoff elections that are harder to win, he said.
“That 50-percent-plus-one rule was put in in order to negate or minimize opportunity for African-Americans to win the primary,” he said. “It’s a very slick way to dilute the impact of the black vote.”
Clyburn said he wants S.C. law changed so a candidate only needs to get 40 percent of the vote when there are three or more candidates in a primary to win the nomination.
Should black or minority candidates get handicap points (like golf), yes or no?
LINK
16
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:34 am to GumboPot
Lanny Guinear solved the problem. Give blacks five votes. I still can't believe that Bill Clinton removed his nomination of her for the Supreme Court when he left Joyclyn Elders as Surgeon General after she said:
"We need to shif money from cancer research to AIDS research. Cuz cancer comes when you're old and takin' out of Social Security. AIDS comes when you young and puttin' into Social Security."
"We need to shif money from cancer research to AIDS research. Cuz cancer comes when you're old and takin' out of Social Security. AIDS comes when you young and puttin' into Social Security."
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:35 am to GumboPot
I have nothing else to say.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:36 am to GumboPot
If a minority candidate receives the majority of the minority; he should be elected.
That would be the fair thing to do don't you think?
Look at our history, has a minority candidate ever gotten less than the majority of votes and still won?? No, and that's not fair.
That would be the fair thing to do don't you think?
Look at our history, has a minority candidate ever gotten less than the majority of votes and still won?? No, and that's not fair.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:39 am to GumboPot
quote:
Should black or minority candidates get handicap points (like golf), yes or no?
He just wants the law changed so that you only need a plurality instead of a majority in the primary. This is pretty common in many places in the country, so I see his point.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:40 am to Zach
quote:
Lanny Guinear solved the problem. Give blacks five votes. I still can't believe that Bill Clinton removed his nomination of her for the Supreme Court when he left Joyclyn Elders as Surgeon General after she said:
"We need to shif money from cancer research to AIDS research. Cuz cancer comes when you're old and takin' out of Social Security. AIDS comes when you young and puttin' into Social Security."
Link please?
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 11:41 am
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:41 am to doubleb
quote:
That would be the fair thing to do don't you think?
Sure, what the hell...who cares?
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:42 am to GumboPot
I think something should be done so that I, as a balding man, am represented.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:43 am to GumboPot
First to a majority voting is a terrible system, however diluting the black vote isn't one of the reasons it is terrible.
It dilutes everyone's vote. Multiple voting makes sense but the D's and R's don't want to threaten their monopoly.
It dilutes everyone's vote. Multiple voting makes sense but the D's and R's don't want to threaten their monopoly.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:46 am to MagicCityBlazer
quote:
Multiple voting makes sense but the D's and R's don't want to threaten their monopoly.
Exactly, Dems have monopolized the art of multiple voting and the Republicans monopolized their opposition to it.
How many times should we all get to vote and for how many candidates?
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:50 am to doubleb
quote:
How many times should we all get to vote and for how many candidates?
I'd say three votes in order of preferred to least preferred.
That way you can have your way to vote third party and if they are mathematically eliminated your vote goes to the one you find less objectionable.
Currently third parties are nonviable as it splits the vote of the most similar candidate and actually HURTS the side you find least objectionable.
First to a majority system is arbitrary and not in any way fair or equitable. It just produces a two-party disaster.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:56 am to MagicCityBlazer
quote:
I'd say three votes in order of preferred to least preferred. That way you can have your way to vote third party and if they are mathematically eliminated your vote goes to the one you find less objectionable. Currently third parties are nonviable as it splits the vote of the most similar candidate and actually HURTS the side you find least objectionable. First to a majority system is arbitrary and not in any way fair or equitable. It just produces a two-party disaster.
That would be an exciting election to follow. I bet the Dems in the big cities would love it.
It might take weeks to declare a winner, but they'd find a way to do it.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 11:59 am to Scruffy
quote:
I have nothing else to say.
Yep, that's about right....Its like we are living in a retarded world all of a sudden...is it just the times? Or is everyone just sick with power?
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:00 pm to trackfan
quote:
Link please?
This is actually real (although, I don't know if LG came up with it). Has been proposed for county boards/city councils with all at-large seats. Rather than one person, one vote, minorities could use their votes however they wished (thus, if there were 5 at large seats, the blacks could give all five votes to a minority candidate for one seat to insure election).
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:06 pm to doubleb
quote:
That would be an exciting election to follow. I bet the Dems in the big cities would love it.
I'm proposing one vote per candidate. It would enable people bypassing the corrupt party leaders for both D and R voters and would ensure that voting against that parties leadership with similar parties wouldn't be stiffled.
I'm not talking about a point system where each vote is a 'point' and you can allocate them as you please.
It would be vote for your preferred candidate, and the next two least objectionable.
The preferred votes are counted and the one with the least votes is eliminated, those votes go to their next favored candidate. So on and so on, until you get a single winner.
Dems actually would be devastated by this because a lot of D voters aren't as liberal as the D party has gone on some topics.
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 12:07 pm
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:06 pm to GumboPot
quote:
“That 50-percent-plus-one rule was put in in order to negate or minimize opportunity for African-Americans to win the primary,” he said. “It’s a very slick way to dilute the impact of the black vote.”
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:07 pm to DrunkenStuporMan
quote:
That 50-percent-plus-one rule
Is a horrible rule, but has nothing to do with black people being relegated politically.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:07 pm to GumboPot
quote:Racist Democrats!
“That 50-percent-plus-one rule was put in in order to negate or minimize opportunity for African-Americans to win the primary,” he said. “It’s a very slick way to dilute the impact of the black vote.”
SC should absolutely allow Dems to declare a primary winner with only 40% of the vote. Heck, drop it to 35%, or less . . . and then comes November
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:07 pm to GumboPot
Clyburn would never be in Washington without his gerrymandered district.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:19 pm to GumboPot
Affirmative Action voting. Jesse is going to pissed he didn't think of this in the 80's
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News