Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread

Digressions into sub-topics are fine, but they shouldn't come to dominate discussion. This thread is about the primaries. At some point the digressions should be tied into the views of actual candidates and/or the electorate.

Ahem.Please, no replies to this message.

Really.Whatever you think it is, it isn't getting any closer to the topic, either.

Yesterday there was a Republican primary in South Carolina and a Democratic caucus in Nevada. In this thread about the primaries and caucuses leading up to the nominating conventions one would expect more than just one person to express an interest (Anglagard above in Message 881).As I said earlier, digressions are fine, but not to the point where they dominate discussion. It would be better if someone would open a thread on PC, but whether or not that happens I will rule that the casting of accusations as if they settled any points of contention should cease. If someone is wrong it is not because they are rightist or PC. Please find more substantive arguments.Edited by Admin, : Minor fix to 1st para.

For anyone interested in discussing the topic, the South Carolina Democratic primary is this Saturday, February 27th. Then next week on March 1st is Super Tuesday, when Alabama, Alaska (Republican only), American Samoa, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont and Virginia hold primaries.A few possible discussion subtopics:

• Why is Trump so appealing?
• Can Trump be stopped?
• Has Hillary halted the Sanders momentum?
• How long before it's effectively decided given that California with its 172 delegates doesn't vote until June 7th?

Edited by Admin, : Typo.

Trump easily won the Nevada Republican caucuses: Some have expressed doubt that the Pershing discussion is on topic. I believe it is. There are a couple core issues. One is whether it is right to murder prisoners without due process and do we want a president who believes it is.The other is more fundamental to a moral democracy. What methods can a moral democracy employ in its defense against a power with no morals, but still legitimately maintain its claim to morality?

I'm just posting this single message as moderator to say that I'd really like to remain an ordinary participant in this thread.So keep that in mind while I say that the response to requests for evidence should be evidence, not name calling. If Muslims in France are torching dozens of cars everyday then it should be possible to find evidence of it.I think there may be a feeling by some that if a claim is made that there must be some truth to it, or if a claim is repeated in many places that it must be true, but that's not a very good starting point for finding truth. Evidence paves the way to truth. Things that are true stand up to skeptical treatment, and they don't become false solely because they're believed by groups you don't like.