WaPo actual article title: It’s time to give the elites a bigger say in choosing the pres

quote:

---

The point is to build a way for party elites to understand what their base is thinking

---

Isn't that the way it was designed to work? It's the so-called elites who have forgotten their bargain with the people.

This should fun to watch as the dems poll the 754 different factions of their party for issues to champion.

I think the worm has turned from 1964 when the media lost their shite about Phyllis Schlafly writing about Rockefeller and the GOP establishment doing this exact thing, calling it a conspiracy theory.

Democracy dies where again now?

quote:

---

For decades, the conversation about nominations has been about the conflicts between party elites and everyone else. Today, that conversation is counterproductive.

---

I’ve been saying that the Dems’ endgame with respect to primaries is to do away with them and just let the party establishment coronate a nominee at the convention.

Multiple reasons they want this:

1. Voters are too stupid to be entrusted to select the right candidate (see Bernie).

2. Money spent campaigning during primaries could instead be diverted to the general election and attacking GOP nominee.

3. No “circular firing squad” with Dems highlighting/exposing negatives about other Dems, one of whom will ultimately become nominee.

4. Voters with a strong emotional attachment to a losing candidate will be more likely to actually vote in the general election rather than pout and stay home in protest (see Bernie supporters).

5. Perceived increase in likelihood of winning in the general election would (assumedly) lead to more donations from contributors reluctant to donate to a candidate for whom victory is less certain.

This is why they created superdelegates. Negative reaction from base regarding superdelegates led to them scaling back their influence in a year the Dem nominee is unlikely to win regardless of who it is or how well they campaign.

This was a calculated move. In the event of a Trump victory, the party elites can contend that if the voters had nominated (insert name) instead of (insert name), the outcome would have been different.

To prevent this from reoccurring, superdelegate power must be expanded enough to enable them to once again totally override the nominee chosen by voters if voters pick the wrong candidate.

The MSM is already starting to push the narrative. Watch, wait and see.

Barring some major unforeseen circumstances such as assassination of POTUS (God forbid), or some major miscalculation by POTUS (very unlikely), Trump will win and GOP possibly/probably retakes the House.

They’ll blame their own voters for this (disingenuously given they know as well as anyone how hard it is to defeat an incumbent), and sell them on the proposed changes to their nominating process by guilting them into acceptance of the new model.

Assuming Trump wins, this absolutely will happen. Initially they’ll probably have to still have primary elections to allow voters to feel involved, but they won’t mean anything with respect to who the party nominates. The plan is to eliminate them altogether for the reasons stated above.

I expect them to do this incrementally for obvious reasons, but they could surprise me and enact the full agenda by 2024 (instead of using 2024 as a bridge to connect superdelegates being given increased authority to override voters and the total elimination of primaries).

Some animals are more equal than others.

quote:

---

WaPo actual article title: It’s time to give the elites a bigger say in choosing the pres

---

Except that is NOT the headline of the WaPo article, which is:

quote:

---

It’s time to switch to preference primaries

---

You call them elites. I call them party activists.

Political parties are private organizations. It makes perfect sense for those active IN that organization to have a larger say in selecting the organization’s nominee than some random yahoo who shows up once every four years to vote in a primary.

The premise of the article is as follows:

quote:

---

A process in which intermediate representatives — elected delegates who understand the priorities of their constituents — can bargain without being bound to specific candidates might actually produce nominees that better reflect what voters want.

---

If you want a bigger “say,” get more involved.

quote:

---

some random yahoo who shows up once every four years to vote in a primary.

---

Let's summarize that short and sweet:

You little plebs can still vote, but we will handle selecting a nominee since we know best.