Change is the future; complacency is demise

[myata]

The nomination process clearly not working. Both parties are failing their responsibility before the citizens and the country: to consider the best candidates for the leader position and nominate those of highest personal integrity, dedication to the principles and values of the democracy, program and vision addressing the problems of the country and the world; and the vigor to execute it successfully.

One of the reasons in my view that it has turned from the crucial period of examination and discussion into some circus show, with tacit consent of the population and by design of the party elites. It has reached the end of the road where it looks little more than a theatrical show. I'll offer some ideas here on the ways how this can be rectified in full understanding of the likely futility. Still it cost me next to nothing, and even if for the record that no one will read, we tried.

Stop the theatrics. Change useless nomination caucuses into country-wide citizen participation and party discussion assemblies that the technology of the day fully allows and supports. Leave no question unanswered and no concern not addressed. Move the live part of it around the country, this is how it was supposed to be: but you forgot.

After the full cycle of discussions, where the candidates had the chance to present themselves, their positions, visions and programs, hold another, the national assembly. Give it days, or weeks to go again over all critical points and issues. And after that, make the intelligent, rational choice for the best candidate among the best.

This is how grown up, intelligent adults do it. It's not some stupid kindergarten show anymore and a lot is at stake these days. Here. Not sure if anyone heard or could be bothered. But it's true, we tried.

[Yakuda]

7 hours ago, myata said:

The nomination process clearly not working. Both parties are failing their responsibility before the citizens and the country: to consider the best candidates for the leader position and nominate those of highest personal integrity, dedication to the principles and values of the democracy, program and vision addressing the problems of the country and the world; and the vigor to execute it successfully.

One of the reasons in my view that it has turned from the crucial period of examination and discussion into some circus show, with tacit consent of the population and by design of the party elites. It has reached the end of the road where it looks little more than a theatrical show. I'll offer some ideas here on the ways how this can be rectified in full understanding of the likely futility. Still it cost me next to nothing, and even if for the record that no one will read, we tried.

Stop the theatrics. Change useless nomination caucuses into country-wide citizen participation and party discussion assemblies that the technology of the day fully allows and supports. Leave no question unanswered and no concern not addressed. Move the live part of it around the country, this is how it was supposed to be: but you forgot.

After the full cycle of discussions, where the candidates had the chance to present themselves, their positions, visions and programs, hold another, the national assembly. Give it days, or weeks to go again over all critical points and issues. And after that, make the intelligent, rational choice for the best candidate among the best.

This is how grown up, intelligent adults do it. It's not some stupid kindergarten show anymore and a lot is at stake these days. Here. Not sure if anyone heard or could be bothered. But it's true, we tried.

Anyone who would actually do a good job as president isnt willing to put themselves through the bullshit of running for the office especially if they're a conservative.

[robosmith]

11 hours ago, myata said:

The nomination process clearly not working. Both parties are failing their responsibility before the citizens and the country: to consider the best candidates for the leader position and nominate those of highest personal integrity, dedication to the principles and values of the democracy, program and vision addressing the problems of the country and the world; and the vigor to execute it successfully.

One of the reasons in my view that it has turned from the crucial period of examination and discussion into some circus show, with tacit consent of the population and by design of the party elites. It has reached the end of the road where it looks little more than a theatrical show. I'll offer some ideas here on the ways how this can be rectified in full understanding of the likely futility. Still it cost me next to nothing, and even if for the record that no one will read, we tried.

Stop the theatrics. Change useless nomination caucuses into country-wide citizen participation and party discussion assemblies that the technology of the day fully allows and supports. Leave no question unanswered and no concern not addressed. Move the live part of it around the country, this is how it was supposed to be: but you forgot.

After the full cycle of discussions, where the candidates had the chance to present themselves, their positions, visions and programs, hold another, the national assembly. Give it days, or weeks to go again over all critical points and issues. And after that, make the intelligent, rational choice for the best candidate among the best.

This is how grown up, intelligent adults do it. It's not some stupid kindergarten show anymore and a lot is at stake these days. Here. Not sure if anyone heard or could be bothered. But it's true, we tried.

The Parties don't choose who is nominated. Candidates decide to run for themselves.

The donor class decides who gets the money necessary to run, along with small contributor donations.

In the age of Internet, ANYONE can raise enough money if they have the TALENT.

From there the TEST is GETTING VOTES. Same as required to win the OFFICE.

The candidates ALREADY "have the chance to present themselves, their positions, visions and programs."

[myata]

Responsible, grown up citizens who are representative of citizens choose the candidate for the party after intelligent and comprehensive discussions of critical issues who will be most effective in presenting the agenda to the country, and implementing it. Not the donor money. Not the theatrics show. How hard is it to see the difference?

[Nationalist]

7 minutes ago, myata said:

Responsible, grown up citizens who are representative of citizens choose the candidate for the party after intelligent and comprehensive discussions of critical issues who will be most effective in presenting the agenda to the country, and implementing it. Not the donor money. Not the theatrics show. How hard is it to see the difference?

You mean like this intelligent old warhorse?

 

Go sober up Myata.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, myata said:

Responsible, grown up citizens who are representative of citizens choose the candidate for the party after intelligent and comprehensive discussions of critical issues who will be most effective in presenting the agenda to the country, and implementing it. Not the donor money. Not the theatrics show. How hard is it to see the difference?

Money is ESSENTIAL to broadcast YOUR MESSAGE to the VOTERS. And "theatrics" can play a role, though is NOT essential. At the least you need enough money or personal work to get your message out so people know for what they're voting. 

Few will vote in the primary for someone they've never heard from.