about primary in USA

[Liquid Len]

The impression I got, I could be wrong, but the impression I got, was that under Clinton the economy was strong, there seemed to be a surplus, the national debt was low. And the economy worsened within a year of Bush getting in.

At least that was a popular perception of the early 00s. Did any of that relate to reality at all, or was it all a massive media fabrication?

[garyb]

clinton set the stage for bush2. these guys all vacation together. they are on the same team.

[Neutron]

Ah, you could be worse off. You could have an evil Zombie in charge like us. >>>

wow you have zombie! does he eat brains?

we only have a robot. it can only repeat what industry robot masters tell it to.

banks had record profits! robot put thumbs up!

doh! cant someone program that thing to smile? even cyber pets can smile.

[hifiboom]

[siriusbliss]

it's different in different states. in many states, one can only vote in one's party for primary elections. in others, any registered voter can vote. crazy, but the federal government is not supposed to be more powerful than state government, which is not supposed to be more powerful than local government...

Originally designed as 'bottom-up' representative elections where delegates are alotted to those candidates that 'win' in any particular district, which is usually a small regional area near where you live (or a registered address).

In some States it's winner take-all, and in others it's divided proportionally to those candidates that win within any particular district.

Of course, nowadays, it's all manipulated and controlled, and the US has become increasingly Federalized/Socialized, with hardly any real represenation at all at the local level. - and obviously we US citizens have lost all liberties and any last sense of true individual sovereignty

G

[siriusbliss]

yes, well the folks who run things have no respect for anyone anyway. we all know that so it's hard to get up the energy to fight against such systematic corruption, knowing that the entire process is meant to make the voter impotent in the final analysis(just pick your "authority" and submit!)...

a funny thing about the company(connected to diebold) that runs all the voting machines in new england, the people in charge and who are writing all the computer code are convicted felons....

and about choosing the "lesser of the two evils", either way one is choosing to be ruled by evil. this is NOT a choice....

Well put!

And whoever is left - probably a hybrid McCain/Clinton/Obama dog-n-pony show (circus), are all owned by some of the largest organizations on the planet.

I'm personally concerned about a further continuation of the Clinton/Bush 'cabal' that has been running things since the Reagan era. Endless war profiteering and hijacking of resources - especially oil (and now water).

It's all very sad and enraging!

Greg

[siriusbliss]

Ive been fighting the urge to jump into this thread for soooo long....


And now Alfonso has made me 'have to' post

America is not and never has been a democracy, the very fact that most people think that it is, should be indicative of how corrupt the system is.

As Garyb has already said, these various state elections mean nothing, the delegates can vote for whomever they choose. This follows through all the way up to the electoral collage during the big one.
Then theres the media manipulation of the events and the way in wich candidates are percieved. Its all BS. Oh yeah and please dont forget 911.
And of course we run into the Diebold machine problem again, never mind the irregularities with paper ballots. Gulliani with his 9.11% of the vote you gotta love that


damn

Yes, a Constitutional Republic is NOT a Democracy (mob rule).

Hard to distinguish in some parts of the world, (and even now in America).

Greg

[siriusbliss]

He voted for the invasion of Afghanistan, he is a conservative and a republican. Those are 3 strikes against him.

Incorrect.

He voted against the invasion since there was never any real declaration of war under the Constitution. (However, since Bush has all but obliterated the Constitution, then what's the point? No declaration of war since WWII).

And thinking a strike against him for simply being conservative (at least he's a true conservative rather than the shamster neocons and fake religious idolotrists), and for simply being a Republican, is a shallow argument once you take a look at his actual voting record.

For those who are hypnotized by Obama should look deeper into his plans and records. He and Clinton and McCain all want to attack Iran, or Pakistan, or whatever.

Yes, the opportunity for an African American or woman as President is great and all, but I'm not duped (or impressed).

Greg

[siriusbliss]

What amazed me at the primary before New Hampshire (Iowa? - it's my age) was a statement from the Barack Obama .
I only half heard it on our news but I'm sure I heard him say:
"First we'll sort America out and then we'll sort the world out" or words to that effect.

Well, I didn't know that the rest of the world was waiting for America to sort it out. We have our own governments for that, thanks very much. If I was American I think on the basis of that, I'd vote for Hilary. She has some great food recipes too.
Mind you women don't generally speak with their mouths full in the White House do they? (Monica?)

Obama speaks like this because he's unfortunately yet another shill for the globalist pranksters running this planet.

[siriusbliss]

that's the thing.. the definition boundary of a state or any governing body isn't the issue I don't think. It's just how power is distributed. By definition, China is supposed to be this one big nation, but inside, it's extremely divided, whether by choice or by natural boundaries. The people feel they are united because of the conceptual definition of "China" as one big nation, but in reality, the power distribution is completely broken apart. It just seems like in US's case, it seems to be by design. Or who knows, maybe it's by chance? (that a country with such advanced infrastructure technology, cannot effectively use it to "unite" the states)

I don't think it's a conspiracy thing.. it's just very smart system design. It drives the economy, and keeps the country going. I don't think it's such a horrible thing.

Yes, it sort of becomes a double-edged sword, with burgeoning innovation offsetting bloated consumption, while the citizens become increasingly dumbed down and apathetic - effectively satiated by bad fast food diets and crappy TV shows.

Sadly a large proportion of the younger Americans cannot even find the city they live in on a map. They have more fascination with Britney Spears' crotch than their direct contribution to their own livelihood. Increased reliance on a welfare-driven hand-out encumbered society that is ever-more reliant on 'daddy' government to take care of them. We saw how well THIS all worked out in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.

Very sad indeed.

[siriusbliss]

thx a lot for all these replies, and thoughts ... any way, unfortunately, i still don't have an answer to my question ... maybe the question was bad exposed !!!

so here it is :

i am mister XX :

A - i live in a state where primaries are organised by parties themselves ...
----- i am not registered in any party ...
Can i vote ?

B - i live in a state where primaries are organised by the federal gvt ...
----- i am not registered in any party ...
Can i vote ?
for which primary ? democrat or repub ?
both ?


this directly brings me to ask this :

How many people (in percentage, ratio, %) efectively vote for these primaries ?

i mean how many people among the "active population" vote ?
(in france are considered as active population, people from 18years old -legal majority - to death - only active people can vote)

sorry for beeing insistant but i don't really understand this "primary" ...
i mean it seems to be so important and mediatic ... but here in france, no one tells us who really vote ...

how it works in france ...
Primaries are organised and controlled only by the parties themselves ... if you are not registered, YOU CAN NOT VOTE, so that a very little ratio of people vote for this primary and it is not as important as in USA, i mean they are not systematic, many times, in fact most of the times, the parties choose their leader internally, without any vote or with a very confidential vote ...

thx again for your lightening posts ...
cheers
olive

It's slightly different for each State - although I think there are really only 3 basic setups - but here in California, if you're registered 'Independent' (not a member of either of the major parties), then I believe it's only possible to vote Independent or Democrat, but in order to vote Republican you HAVE to be registered as a Republican.

It IS a shim-sham designed to leverage 'the machine' while effectively (and cleverly) isolating the 'sovereign individual' (human being).

Crazy stuff. Too bad it's all a lie.

[garyb]

what makes you think obama isn't "white establishment"? have you checked his lineage? what makes you think hillary isn't "white establishment"? have you checked hers, or who she's married to? have you checked either's affilliations? these people aren't outsiders....