Is the US presidential race 'rigged'?

The United States may be a democracy, but the party presidential nomination process - upon closer inspection - is hardly a shining beacon of democratic light.

For most of US history, party nominees have been decided by political power brokers and deal-makers behind closed doors. Parties operate like private clubs - they make their own rules and are suspicious of outsiders.

Only in recent history has a more open system of primaries and caucuses been grafted onto the process to give the average American a say in who appears on the general election ballot.

In a close, contentious primary season, however, the veneer of accountability can rub off, exposing the sometimes unsightly gears that still power the US political system.

This has prompted objection from the supporters of two candidates in particular - Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders - who feel that the party establishments are arrayed against their presidential quests.

But are their concerns valid? Here are answers to four pertinent questions as the nomination battles approach their final months.

Is Trump being cheated?

34
Number of delegates Ted Cruz received in Colorado, which held conventions to pick delegates
743 Trump total delegate count

545 Cruz total delegate count

AP

AP

Mr Trump is leading the race for the Republican nomination, but it's starting to feel like he's not winning.

While he's comfortably ahead, with 743 delegates to second-place Ted Cruz's 545, there's mounting evidence that he's being outmanoeuvred in a behind-the-scenes political process that could come into play if he doesn't reach the magic 1,237 delegate number necessary to secure the nomination outright.

In Colorado - which selected its delegates last week at party gatherings instead of through primaries or caucuses - Mr Cruz walked away with all 34 delegates. Even in states that have held contests won by Mr Trump, Mr Cruz's team has been working doggedly to ensure that their people become delegates.

While Mr Trump swept South Carolina's 50 delegates, for instance, the state's convention delegation will be riddled with Cruz supporters who, while bound to Mr Trump on the first few ballots, can switch to the Texas senator if there is a protracted convention battle.

It has Mr Trump and his people crying foul.

"This is happening all over our country - great people being disenfranchised by politicians," Mr Trump tweeted on Monday. "Repub party is in trouble!"

Paul Manafort, Mr Trump's new aide in charge of managing the delegate-selection process, accused the Cruz campaign of using "Gestapo tactics, scorched-earth tactics" in Colorado.

If, as Mr Trump asserted on Monday, the system is "rigged" and "crooked", however, it isn't always tilted in favour of Mr Trump's opponents. Thanks to the Republican Party's delegate-apportioning system, including Florida's winner-take-all primary, Mr Trump has secured a larger share of the delegates so far (45%) than he has of the raw primary vote (37%).

If Mr Cruz manages to win the nomination at the Republican convention despite trailing Mr Trump in total delegates and share of the popular vote, Mr Trump may have reason to feel aggrieved.

But before he complains too loudly, he might want to heed some sage advice attributed (incorrectly) to Albert Einstein: "You have to learn the rules of the game. And then you have to play better than anyone else."

Mr Trump should be familiar with the quote, since he tweeted it in October 2014.


More: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-36029381

The US system is so complicated I can't make head nor tail of it to be honest.  Just when I think I have a handle on it I find out something else and think 'what the fuck'!!!!

I admit it has me scratching my head and I'm a little worried about asking one of the Americans on here as I'll end up asking too many questions.....
And then they'll run away from me

Whoever thought it up had to be kidding lol

because these are not rules persay
they are just the selction process, in both our nations it is not particualry public and the parties just decide ... but we both have the queen as head of state so there is no direct comparision to president.

keep in mind that the 'leader of the house' is the equivelent of the PM

The parties are not democratic, per se. It's a private affair, not subject to governmental regulation. Both the Democratic and the Republican Parties are like private clubs; they don't have to be democratic.

It is the general election that must be democratic.

And just to defend the crazy complicated and not-nearly-transparent-or-democratic process a bit -- the parties do look for electable candidates who will appeal to the greatest number of Americans, even back in the days when they weren't democratic at all.

If they don't get someone who can get votes, they fail -- so the motivation is to find candidates whose message will resonate with the wishes of the public.

I think the real revolution is in finding what the candidates really stand for as opposed to what they say. The watershed moment was Mitt Romney's 47 percent comment, which he obviously didn't intend for public consumption.

By the way, I'm an American -- ask me anything! Hopefully I'll have a few answers that non-Americans don't.

Erm ok.....how does the voting system work?
Please keep it simple as I'm entirely stupid

It’s simple…if you want to run, go ahead and sign up within the time limits.  Still true.  You can still run as an 'independent'.  But, as it developed, it soon became apparent that you might need a little help in the form of friends and money.  

People of a like mind politically began to form factions around their common ideas.  Thus political parties were born.  If you wanted these political parties to back you, you joined and went to meetings, called caucuses, and convinced others you were the best person for the job.  Each state had its own caucus, and each state got so many ‘electors’ to be sent to a general meeting, called a national Convention.  So you, the candidate, went around state-to-state, trying to convince each state caucus to commit to you at the Convention, whereupon if successful you would become the candidate.

Eventually, caucuses were too cumbersome so they developed the idea of a mini-election, called a state primary election ("primaries").  The state primaries elected the ‘electors’ and sent them to the national Convention.  These private parties mimicked the general pattern of democracy, and so they became associated with democracy.  But they need not be married to the concept.  Several states still use the caucus method.

The state parties are still private associations.  They are not constitutionally bound to any particular form of government or political theory.  All they have to do is deliver so many pre-disposed electors to the national Convention.  

If they all do not agree on the first round of vote, it is apparent some changes must happen.  Each elector has fulfilled his obligation, and s/he is then released to vote in whatever way s/he choses.  Then it becomes a 'brokered convention', which you are hearing about.  The candidates begin brokering votes.  Switches and trade-offs are are made and...well, it becomes brokered.

These are still private groups.  So no law is imposed on them.  Unlike the general election, they are just trying to decide on a proposed offeree (candidate) in their own private way. That's as best as I can explain it. If I've left something out, someone please add or otherwise correct me.

Overview of ballot access

Each U.S. State has its own ballot access laws to determine who may appear on ballots. According to the Elections Clause in Article I, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, the authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of federal elections is up to each State, unless Congress legislates otherwise.
The primary argument put forward by States for restricting ballot access has been the presumption that setting ballot access criteria too low would result in numerous candidates on the ballot, splitting the votes of similar minded voters. Example: With Plurality voting, an old but common way to pick the winner, the candidate with the most votes wins, even if the candidate does not have a majority of the votes. Suppose 55% liberals and 45% conservatives vote in a district. If two candidates appeal to liberals, but only one appeals to conservatives, the votes of liberals will likely split between the two liberal candidates, for example 25% may vote for one and 30% for the other, giving the conservative the office although 55% preferred to see a liberal in the office.
for the entire due process >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_access

How do presidential candidates get their name on the ballot?
It depends on which state you come from. Each state has a different ballot with different rules. Your best chance is to become a Democrat or Republican nominee. The next step is winning enough of the party's primary elections in order to be selected at the national convention. In order to win that you would normally have to been involved with that party for many years and have qualities that your party and the people of that party like. There is a ton of competition here and if you don't have connections it is really a long shot! There are third-party and independent candidates as well. It would be easier to be endorsed by them as there is less competition but these smaller parties don't have as much money or voter support in general. Thus, it would be very difficult to get elected as a third-party or independent candidate.
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_do_presidential_candidates_get_their_name_on_the_ballot 

[PDF]

USA Elections in Brief - State
photos.state.gov/.../publications-english/USA_Elections_InBrief.pdf
USA ELECTIONS in Brief. ... and their candidates tend to adapt electoral strategies ... ballots for each election and make sure that all certified

 So you want to run for president - politics | NBC News
www.nbcnews.com/id/18701434/ns/politics/t/so-you-want-run-president[url=http://www.bing.com/search?q=what does it cost all of the candidates to get their names on each states ballots what fee is][/url]
So you want to run for president ... Each state has different requirements for a contender to get ... How much would it cost to get on the ballot in all 50 states?

A.Q. Why does an independent need a bevy of ballot access experts, signature gatherers, and lawyers?
A. Each state has different requirements for a contender to get his name on the ballot. In California, for example an independent would need nearly 160,000 signatures, while in Minnesota he’d need only 2,000.

Allow me to preface this entire debacle with this: Chump-Trump has yet to EVER vote at any POTUS election --- NOPE/NADA/NEVER and even his very own children won't be able to vote for their POPPA because they were sooooo LAME that they didn't even make sure they were registered to VOTE!!!


And each state has a set 'Filing Fee' in order to get your name on the primary caucus ballot --- Only Ted Cruz and Donald filed in KS...

And Ted Cruz and Donald Trump knew about the process and their campaign managers should have had the method clearly understood and perfected down to the dotted 'I' and crossed 'T'; whining about their confusion after the fact is just that - WHINING ~~~

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good Grief, so they are standing but can't vote.  It gets weirder!

sassy wrote:AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good Grief, so they are standing but can't vote.  It gets weirder!

This entire TRUMP family remind me of those 'Cut Out Paper Dolls' we had wayyyy back when I was a little kid; my aren't they pretty to look at my there's NO SUBSTANCE THERE --- Air Heads R Us, could be the campaign slogan for his agenda!