the conventions loom large this cycle

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:23 pm

well...., the delegates to the respective party s conventions may actually decide some important things this cycle

will they nominate an indicted , or possibly indicted , serial liar?

will they nominate a possible megalomaniac and fascist?

...or will they seize the moment, and the feeling in the country, and assert their power by going against establishment and tradition?

this just gets curiouser and curiouser....

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Wed Dec 09, 2015 4:12 am

Bernie!

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Wed Dec 09, 2015 4:48 am

Bernie doesn t sound so bad right now...., shoot me, shoot me now.....

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Wed Dec 09, 2015 5:19 am

You should listen to that speech I posted a few weeks ago. Really, it's worth your time.

Fafhrd · Post by **Fafhrd** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:52 pm

Sorry, the conventions are now meaningless. All delegates to them are now bound by the results of the primaries or caucuses in their respective states.

dgs49 · Post by **dgs49** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:41 pm

Only on the first ballot. After that it's a free-for-all.

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:27 am

Only on the first ballot.

in some states it's two ballots...

And then of course there are the "Super Delegates" for each party, ( the party poobahs and swells that automatically become delegates and aren't bound to vote for anyone....)

Jarlaxle · Post by **Jarlaxle** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:52 pm

Am I the only one thinking that voting in 2016 might require getting loaded first?

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:55 pm

you are not, but I don t drink anymore....

MajGenl.Meade · Post by **MajGenl.Meade** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:58 pm

Jarlaxle wrote:Am I the only one thinking that voting in 2016 might require getting loaded first?

FTFY

Jarlaxle · Post by **Jarlaxle** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:14 pm

wesw wrote:you are not, but I don t drink anymore....

Neither do I...but there is time before the election.

oldr_n_wsr · Post by **oldr_n_wsr** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:06 pm

Make the call BEFORE you pick up

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:15 pm

what are they gonna do, stop the convention and sue the delegates if they don t vote as required?

Big RR · Post by **Big RR** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:17 pm

I would think someone could sue to enjoin the party from nominating the candidate if it did not follow its rules; it wouldn't be pretty whichever way the courts ruled.

Guinevere · Post by **Guinevere** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:31 pm

If the delegates' actions were ultra vires (beyond the scope of their authority) then a candidate could sue to have the result of their actions declared null and void, and a court could require them to go back and act in accord with their instructions. A court would take those issues on an emergency basis, and would make the rulings quickly. Even appeals could be expedited -- as per Bush v. Gore.

Every convention there is talk of rogue delegates, and it never happens, and will never happen. Who runs and gets elected as delegates? Who are the super delegates? The party loyalists, of course.

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 11:10 pm

Complete digression:

Guin:

It just recently discovered that the quote that you have in your sigline attributed to Ginsburg actually first appeared in the plurality opinion written by O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case, decided in 1992. (It was referenced in an op-ed piece I read today in the Chron.)

She must have been quoting them. Here's the paragraph from the opinion in which it appears:

To eliminate the issue of reliance that easily, however, one would need to limit cognizable reliance to specific instances of sexual activity. But to do this would be simply to refuse to face the fact that for two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail. The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives. See, e.g., R. Petchesky, Abortion and Woman's Choice 109, 133, n. 7 (rev. ed. 1990). The Constitution serves human values, and while the effect of reliance on Roe cannot be exactly measured, neither can the certain cost of overruling Roe for people who have ordered their thinking and living around that case be dismissed.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-744.ZO.html

Guinevere · Post by **Guinevere** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 11:30 pm

I know LJ. There just isn't enough room in the sig line for the full citation.

Joe Guy · Post by **Joe Guy** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:03 am

Maybe there would be room if the fonts weren't so big and bold....

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:06 am

there is room

Guinevere · Post by **Guinevere** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:13 am

and

Plan B Forum

the conventions loom large this cycle

the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle