Why Republican primaries are a waste of time?

@sirnose (2436)
United States
January 9, 2012 12:21pm CST
It’s well known that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee. Why this waste of time with the Republican primary? I feel that the Republicans as well as the Democrats nominates weak or poor presidential candidates anyway, and I don’t see any reason to waste voters time when everyone knows who will be the nominees.
4 people like this
5 responses
sierras236
@sierras236 (2739)
• United States
9 Jan 12
People need to vote for the favorite candidates. It is the way the system works. It is not a waste of time but a very necessary way to choose the Representative for the individual Party. If you remember the Democratic Primaries, Hillary Clinton had the lock at the beginning. In four years, it will be the Democrats battling it out in another round of Primaries regardless of who is President. Will those Primaries be a "waste of time" as well?
3 people like this
sirnose
@sirnose (2436)
• United States
9 Jan 12
Yes, I think those primaries will be a waste of time also, we need a new approach to how we determine our presidential nominees. Just like we need to update our constitution and laws in this country to keep up with the times. ...
2 people like this
sierras236
@sierras236 (2739)
• United States
9 Jan 12
I am curious what system would you propose? It may be old-fashioned but if you think about all of the other options, this is the only one that is really the "fairest" way. BTW There are still Democratic Primaries in Progress as well. There are about 13 names on the Democratic list for New Hampshire.
2 people like this
sirnose
@sirnose (2436)
• United States
9 Jan 12
And how many has a chance of hi-jacking Pres. Obama? Nada, nil, zero chances, plus the media never mention the other candidates of the Democrats. I never knew that there was 13 on the Democratic slate of nominees.
2 people like this
deebomb
@deebomb (15304)
• United States
9 Jan 12
sirnose If the primaries were not important then no one would be paying any attention to them. you may find the primaries a wast of time but I want to have more than one choice right now. I want to see the very best man win. I want to know as much about each candidates as possible before I vote for any of them. Besides the primaries prepare the candidates for the final run.
2 people like this
sirnose
@sirnose (2436)
• United States
9 Jan 12
Oh please! what choice you have, most Americans would prefer anyone but the slate of candidates that these two parties presents to us. what very best men or women you speak of? These candidates including Pres. Obama leave a bitter taste in my mouth. They're all bad!...
2 people like this
deebomb
@deebomb (15304)
• United States
9 Jan 12
I still want a choice.
1 person likes this
mehale
@mehale (2200)
• United States
28 Jan 12
It’s well known that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee. REALLY???? I guess you have some informant or other connection to the GOP party so that you can be privy to this information, when other more COMMON Americans like us who actually pay attention and try to vote for the best candidate that we are given are not? MUST BE NICE. Oh, BTW, I guess that means that HILLARY is President where you live since EVERYONE knew she would get the nomination last go round!
1 person likes this
anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
12 Feb 12
You're absolutely right, mehale, just like everyone just "knew" Rudy "Noun, Verb, 9-11" Giuliani would be the GOP nominee last time around! Sometimes those crystal balls go all wacky on us...lol! Annie
sirnose
@sirnose (2436)
• United States
28 Jan 12
It is well known that "Slick Mitt" is the Republican appointed one. You don't need a crystal ball to see who will be running against Pres. Obama. Hillary is Sect. of State so I don't know where you are coming from... you sound as if you are living in a "rubber room."
anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Feb 12
I realize given that hindsight is 20/20 this isn't quite fair since you started this discussion about two months ago, but it's definitely NOT so well known anymore than Romney will be the Republican nominee, is it? If that were the case then there's been a LOT of time AND money wasted in recent weeks! You ARE right about Mitt Romney being the GOP candidate whose "turn" it is but this election may be one of the rare exceptions to the way Republicans usually choose their nominees. They just don't like Romney, simple as that, and I sure can't say that I blame them. Of course, I don't find anything to like about any of the other Republicans either... Annie
sirnose
@sirnose (2436)
• United States
27 Feb 12
Mitt Romney is still the favorite to win the Republican nomination, of course Rick Santorum is a close second after he started catering the religious right vote. But it still won't be enough for him to overcome Romney cash flow and fat cat backers. Rick Santorum just don't have the cash flow to beat Romney in these primaries. It may come down to a broker's convention where Newt,Santorum make a deal with Romney to get their support.
Taskr36
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
9 Jan 12
"It’s well known that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee." Yeah, I remember back when people were saying that about Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton. I can't imagine why we wasted our time with primaries in 2008 when everyone KNEW those two would be the nominees.
2 people like this
Taskr36
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
9 Jan 12
You're right that it's a dog and pony show, as the two party system generally is. I disagree that anything is predetermined though. The votes still count.
2 people like this
sirnose
@sirnose (2436)
• United States
9 Jan 12
Primaries are just a dog and pony show for those two-head monsters we call our political parties. It is widely known that the candidate for president is predetermine through backroom deals and comprises ......
1 person likes this