"The U.S. system of presidential primaries are contrary to democratic values"

These don't seem like Democratic principles to me at all. They seem to be based off of Liberalism, and have nothing to do with Democracy at all. Life: A person's right to life can't be violated except if your life or the lives of others is threatened. This is an interesting concept. I doubt it is practical for a government to adopt this as a value without thoroughly defining how one's right to life can be violated. Is it solely violated by action, or in action? When our government bombed "bunkers" or perhaps bomb shelters, in Iraq during operation shock and awe which were largely full of civilizing hoping to escape the coming attack, did the United States violate this principal? And if so, what consequences did the Government face? The Pursuit of Happiness: So, this principal which you allege to be "Democratic," effectively states that a citizen is to be 100% self serving, so long as while they're serving themselves, they don't interfere with others? No human is a vacuum. Seeking happiness in our own way often has consequences on others. I don't see how this value can be adopted by any society, unless it is one in which individuals live in complete isolation from each other. In Athens, the true Democracy, civic responsibility was to the Demos and the nation state. Personal happiness and gratification was not the purpose of the government, virtue was found in sacrifice, not in pleasure. These personal, political, and economic freedoms also seem to be things that don't exist in absolutes. You've the right to buy, sell, and trade certain private properties not all, you have certain political freedoms, for instance the first amendment does not allow you to form a mob to lynch a politician for betraying his people and nation. What kind of political freedom is that? This personal freedom seems like a give me as well. One can always think and act without control. It the consequences to these actions that is significant. And there are many actions that have consequences that are prorogated by the United States Government. Common Good: Working together for the welfare of the community or the benefit of all. This seems to be a good idea, but I don't think the United States has successfully implemented this value. Therefore, it must not be a value of the United States or its people. It is, however, a value that could be found in Athens during its Democratic government. How can an emphasis for the common good coexist with the pursuit of happiness? Look at Handsoff's typical arguments. His pursuit of happiness seems rudely interrupted by this common good notion. Justice: All people should be treated fairly in both the benefits and the obligations of society. No individual or group should be favored over another person or group. This certainly cannot be a value of the United States. It also is not a Democratic value. It's a very Liberalist value, however the United States seems to have made little or no effort as a people to try to maintain this value in actuality. If you need one of the scores of examples for this, I will happily provide them. Equality: If everyone were truly equal, why do we not select our leaders at random? The Democratic ideal was that since each citizen of Attica was equal, with equal rights, and equal risk in the government, that leaders were selected at random from the citizens. An examination of the current affairs in the United States will clearly show that there are people without the same legal rights as others. People are not treated the same. If this is a value of the United States, it's a value that has always failed. Diversity: …but celebrated as a strength. Really? Truth: Truth belongs only to Philosophy. And even then, no one agrees on what truth is. The United States lies. The people lie to their government. The politicians lie to their constituents. We do not demand the truth, and we certainly don't expect the truth. If we do, we would likely see several key members of our government jailed our executed for treason. Popular Sovereignty: Every government's sovereignty comes from the people. Revolutions used to happen to replace kings and aristocrats with other kings and aristocrats. Popular sovereignty does not exist solely in "representative" governments. It is not a value of Democracy, but a value of all governments. Patriotism: This word has its origins in Latin. It is an old idea. Yes, in Athens they had patriots. The United States has them too, but so did the Soviet Union, the Third Reich, and every other government that has ever existed. To claim it as a "core value" is to state that it is undemocratic to not always be proud of your government. Doesn't that contradict your political freedom notion? Constitutional Principles Rule of Law: The Government doesn't obey laws. The Bush Administration has made this very clear. It has flagrantly violated the constitution, and guess what, the government is responsible for enforcing the constitution on itself. The people of the United States have left that responsibility with the government because they've refused to stand up for this constitutional principle, and when no one fights for a principle, it does not exist. Separation of Powers: What if all three powers are controlled by one outside force? Representative Government: According to the original form of the Constitution, they only had the right to elect representatives to the House of Representatives, and to no other aspect of their government. Also, "people" meant citizens which owned land and were not black. Checks and Balances: Executive has failed to follow the constitution, congress has failed to impeach, and the judiciary has failed to rule. The balance must be broken. Individual Rights: That stuff's not actually in the Constitution. It's flowery poetry from a different, non-binding document. I'm not attacking definitions, I'm attacking your argument. The values you think our primary process violates are not, nor have ever actually been values of the United States in practicality. Flowery poetry not based in reality is something different all together. I'm sorry you've been caught up in the poetry. Those values presented are not the values of the United States. They are perhaps mythical values taught to school children, but when scrutinized, it is clear the United States does not uphold these values. These values are also not "Democratic" values. Calling them such does not erase the fact that Democratic values come from Athens, and that Athens would consider this primary process to be against their democratic values, but not for the reasons you propose. Because these values are mythical at best, they are not present in your election process, and never will be. Prove to me that these values are actually values, or have ever been values of the United States, and perhaps we can then discuss whether or not the primaries do not reflect the "Democratic Values of the United States." To me it is clear that these are not the values of the United States. I know you were expecting a debate where your opponent said that the primary process is a reflection of "democratic values," however I'm more concerned with the fact that your argument does not support your conclusion because it's based off of ideas and notions that do not manifest themselves in the reality of your nations government. To me the argument you're making is similar to expecting polytheists to incorporate monotheism into their religious practices. Also, I believe that if one were to select thirty folks at random, and then from that thirty came the person to lead for that day, it would constitute a primary. However, the randomness is what made it Democratic, not Universal Suffrage.