REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Well... I thought it was a good idea.

POSTED BY: 6IXSTRINGJACK
UPDATED: Sunday, June 3, 2018 19:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 66
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, June 3, 2018 5:08 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


A while back in here I shared my idea that primaries should be open and that anybody should be able to vote for anyone on either side and should not have to identify as either a Republican or Democrat.

My thinking was that this would ultimately ensure that the people would start voting in politicians closer to the center rather than the fringes, and my argument against anybody claiming that people would intentionally try to sabotage the other side was that even if that happened at first it wouldn't be long before everyone wised up and realized that with this new voting system it doesn't help them out at all if they're intentionally voting for horrible choices on the other side of the ballot.


It turns out that this was already done, but our Supreme Court, in their "infinite wisdom" put an end to it.

Quote:

California, a state that long has a reformist bent, has been on a quest for the ideal system for nominating candidates, one that would put the decision in the most hands possible. Two decades ago, through another ballot initiative, voters eliminated closed primaries (open only to members of the specified party) and replaced them with what were called blanket primaries. In those primaries, all candidates were listed on the same ballot and voters could decide whom to support. But unlike today’s open primary, the top vote-getter from each party advanced to the general election.

The Supreme Court struck down that system, declaring that it made it impossible for political parties to control their own elections. In 2010, the open primary system was installed.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/analysis-california%e2%80%99s-
open-primaries-are-a-cautionary-tale-about-political-reform/ar-AAy9d9p?ocid=spartanntp




Nine people decided this wasn't a good idea.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2018 7:35 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
A while back in here I shared my idea that primaries should be open and that anybody should be able to vote for anyone on either side and should not have to identify as either a Republican or Democrat.

My thinking was that this would ultimately ensure that the people would start voting in politicians closer to the center rather than the fringes, and my argument against anybody claiming that people would intentionally try to sabotage the other side was that even if that happened at first it wouldn't be long before everyone wised up and realized that with this new voting system it doesn't help them out at all if they're intentionally voting for horrible choices on the other side of the ballot.


It turns out that this was already done, but our Supreme Court, in their "infinite wisdom" put an end to it.

Quote:

California, a state that long has a reformist bent, has been on a quest for the ideal system for nominating candidates, one that would put the decision in the most hands possible. Two decades ago, through another ballot initiative, voters eliminated closed primaries (open only to members of the specified party) and replaced them with what were called blanket primaries. In those primaries, all candidates were listed on the same ballot and voters could decide whom to support. But unlike today’s open primary, the top vote-getter from each party advanced to the general election.

The Supreme Court struck down that system, declaring that it made it impossible for political parties to control their own elections. In 2010, the open primary system was installed.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/analysis-california%e2%80%99s-
open-primaries-are-a-cautionary-tale-about-political-reform/ar-AAy9d9p?ocid=spartanntp




Nine people decided this wasn't a good idea.

The Democrat Party sued, and 7 SCOTUS Justices agreed.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 3, 2018 7:58 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Yeah, the primary system in CA right now is kinda fucked up. Each party has its own ballot, so if you register "no party preference" you might not get to vote for a particular party's candidate. Right now the Republican party doesn't allow "no party preference" to obtain a GOP ballot, so their candidate only reflects the party faithful's vote. That's a problem because "no party preference" is the second-largest category of registered voter.

It's only AFTER the voting that political affiliation is tossed to the wind. So if you have a lot of people voting for two Democratic candidates and not so many people voting on the GOP ballot, the two top vote-getters may both be Dems.

OTOH, right now the CA Dem party is in complete disarray. There are six, seven, or more Dems for many open offices, leading to such significant vote-splitting that the top vote-getters may be a Repub and Dem anyway, or even a Repub and Repub. I'm not sure what issue(s) is (are) splitting Dem party candidates so thoroughly that so many feel the need to run for office even if it jeopardizes their party, but it might be immigration and fiscal issues. Overall, I've been too busy with home renovation to bird dog the issues in detail.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

As long as you insist that everything is the Republicans'/ Democrats' fault, then you fail to grasp the REAL problem with American politics.

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL