I agree. Just poorly trying to say that in these cases the left is focused on being the progressive party to break barriers which decreases their chances of winning. And I agree with breaking barriers but you can’t force it.
You say that in jest, but that would put a whole lot more stock into the popular vote argument, especially this year - let the popular vote winner from the Democrats be your nominee.
Our whole Presidential election process is borked. But, that is what you get when you are the first out of the gate on something way back in 1787.
I wouldn't be opposed to a popular vote for the primary, but it's probably a challenge when they have caucuses and other goofy types of formats for determining delegates.
I've said each congressional district should be one elector vote, and the winner of the state gets the other two.
Aren't most of the primaries proportional in awarding delegates? I still dislike the idea of giving votes by congressional district as it still allows for disproportionate vote value.
But a true democracy isn't desirable either. Plus we should add to the number of congressional districts to 30-50 thousand per district.
James Carville fired back at Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for calling him "a political hack," calling the self-described democratic socialist "a communist." The back and forth follows a week in which Carville has repeatedly sounded the alarm about a potential Sanders match-up against President Trump in November, calling the scenario "the end of days" for the Democratic Party while referring to Sanders supporters as "a cult." https://thehill.com/homenews/media/...ers-for-hack-slam-at-least-im-not-a-communist