The Democratic Party claim their candidates lost the last two elections due to sharp practice, the hanging chad election in the state of Florida swinging the vote the Republicans’ way in 2000 and the mystery of the missing ballot boxes in Ohio deciding the outcome in 2004.
In both cases the Democratic Party’s complaints seem to have some substance but here in the U.K. I accept that we are not always given the full picture.
What leading Democrats play down is their own role in engineering those defeats, complacency in 2000 and the selection of a candidate in 2004, the most memorable thing about whom was the size of his chin.
The latest Democrat debacle has left me gobsmacked at the sheer political ineptitude of the organisation however. So far I have been unimpressed by the lacklustre performance of candidates and took little interest in the selection process, looking only at the results. A couple of weeks ago however an article appeared in the British press; its writer who is known for her liberal political views pointed to how the 2008 election had been handed to the republicans long before the Primary season began.
My understanding of the American system is that each party holds a series of contests to select its strongest candidate and they then go head to head. You don’t have to be a mastermind to understand this, it is hardly Byzantine in its complexity, so basic in fact that one would expect a retarded earthworm to get it.
So why don’t the effing democrats?
What has been happening you see is the Democrats in many states have been letting Republican supporters help choose who will be the Democratic candidate. DEMOCRATS, WHAT THE EFF ARE YOU THINKING OF, these people hate you, they hate your liberal policies, they hate your internationalist approach to foreign affairs, they hate you collectivist take on social affairs. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR YOUR STRONGEST CANDIDATE.
Can anyone with even the smallest trace of political nous see the British Labour or Conservative parties allowing their opponents to choose their leaders? Would Germany’s Social Democrats and Christian Democrats open their leadership contests to supporters of their rivals? Do France’s Gaullists consult the socialists on who should be Presidential candidate – the socialists in France can hardly bring themselves to wish a Gaullist good morning let alone seek an opinion on who should fight an election.
See how it works?
America’s Democratic party it seems are so concerned with being seen to be inclusive and politically correct they have lost sight of the fact that their opponents, no matter what we think of their policies, are a formidable political machine. The potential of tactical voting will not have escaped them.
"Hey guys, this is great, we don’t have to fight their best guy, we get to pick who we want to fight. Mobilise the troops to take part in the Democrats primary and vote for the dickhead. Then the big one will be like shooting fish in a barrel.
The press article I mentioned above noted how a big majority of Republicans and Independents voting in Democratic primaries have supported Barak Obama. The writer also pointed out that the Republican media have treated Obama very gently.
Do you see a shape beginning to unfold here?
