My point is more: Super Tuesday took forever to get to and even then we shouldn't have a "Super Tuesday" and then a trickle of about 30-35 states primaries after that. The primary system in general is dumb because of how long the process takes.
I would've voted/nominated Sanders in the primary full-stop. But 1) By the time the state I'm in would've gotten to it: He dropped out/Super Tuesday's "rigging" happened and his chances were sank. and 2) the state I'm in would require me to change my party nomination to nominate him (or Trump or any other Republican) in their primaries.
I'm sure there's a lot of younger voters that aren't registered in either party that would be excluded on #2 and even if they weren't couldn't get a chance to have their voice heard due to #1/long primary voting process.
OK, it's dumb. But if the left can't figure out a game designed by politics dorks because it's complicated or it takes too long, how the hell is the left supposed to win a revolution? Or how the hell is the left supposed to organize protracted general strikes? Or how the hell is the left supposed to do any significant non-electoral strategy, because at bottom they're all more complicated than a primary and require something closer to actual sacrifice.
That's my main issue with people who talk about abandoning electoralism completely: they stuff they're suggesting as alternatives won't work until we have widespread popular support, and I don't see a way of gaining widespread popular support that doesn't involve (at least in part) doing politics the way most Americans think politics are done (i.e., through elections). The fastest way to build a leftist movement is to have popular leftist candidates running in races people care about. If you win you win; if you lose you still get leftist ideas out there to people we need to persuade.
My point is more: Super Tuesday took forever to get to and even then we shouldn't have a "Super Tuesday" and then a trickle of about 30-35 states primaries after that. The primary system in general is dumb because of how long the process takes.
I would've voted/nominated Sanders in the primary full-stop. But 1) By the time the state I'm in would've gotten to it: He dropped out/Super Tuesday's "rigging" happened and his chances were sank. and 2) the state I'm in would require me to change my party nomination to nominate him (or Trump or any other Republican) in their primaries.
I'm sure there's a lot of younger voters that aren't registered in either party that would be excluded on #2 and even if they weren't couldn't get a chance to have their voice heard due to #1/long primary voting process.
OK, it's dumb. But if the left can't figure out a game designed by politics dorks because it's complicated or it takes too long, how the hell is the left supposed to win a revolution? Or how the hell is the left supposed to organize protracted general strikes? Or how the hell is the left supposed to do any significant non-electoral strategy, because at bottom they're all more complicated than a primary and require something closer to actual sacrifice.
That's my main issue with people who talk about abandoning electoralism completely: they stuff they're suggesting as alternatives won't work until we have widespread popular support, and I don't see a way of gaining widespread popular support that doesn't involve (at least in part) doing politics the way most Americans think politics are done (i.e., through elections). The fastest way to build a leftist movement is to have popular leftist candidates running in races people care about. If you win you win; if you lose you still get leftist ideas out there to people we need to persuade.