Thus we see why some people vote for Trump.

I thought the 2016 GOP was a celebrity roast, or maybe, Whose Line Is It, Anyway?

Given the talk about the tiny orange penis and women spewing bloody from their “whatevers,” it’s more like a Austin Powers’ movie.

Backgammon, OTOH, is a race game that balances strategy with chance, but I don’t know of any politicians for whom it’s the game of choice. Maybe it’s one for the campaign managers…

It’s not either or. Yes, the primaries are an audition, but they also provide the process with “will of the people” democratic legitimacy. There was a time when primaries didn’t exist. The purpose of primaries was to ensure a more democratic process.

No, I understood exactly what you said.

When Sanders complained about the closed primary, he was being, you know, dishonest, to motivate the ignorant. He obviously knows better.

I’m remarking on the number of people I see commenting in various venues who are actually ignorant, and can’t take a minute to think it through. Really, it isn’t like climate change, where you have to learn a little about physics and statistics to see the fallacies. As you nicely describe in #27, it’s pretty obvious.

But with respect to your latter paragraph, the primaries are not about legitimacy— they are in effect auditions. Without the long, grueling, and complicated process, how would anyone know (including the smoke-filled-room people) which potential candidate is most likely to be a winner in the general election?

This is a particularly irksome issue for me, when the Sanders campaign people (the professionals) compare this to 2008. I was an early Obama supporter, I followed Obama closely, and Sanders is no Obama. Of course, these guys want to keep it going so they can continue to get paid.

Perhaps. Or:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/19/1517351/-Democracy-It-isn-t-what-you-think

My personal observation is that a lot of politics is negotiating postures.

Famously, game of choice:
Obama -> poker player
McCain -> craps player