19
   

Would open primaries lead to a more moderate government?

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Oct, 2013 04:51 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Of course not.

You're a moderate.

And you try not to stink.


I am not even a moderate, Finn. On a continuum with very liberal at 1 and very conservative at 10...I can be found at position "p."


But you are correct, I try not to stink. Shower every day (well, I do miss once in a while.)
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Oct, 2013 04:52 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Yeah, I get the idea...more bullshit.


C'mon, Finn. A sense of humor is a must when discussing the way you are.

Work with me here.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  3  
Reply Tue 29 Oct, 2013 05:05 pm
@Frank Apisa,
C'mon Frank. I enjoy humor as much as anyone else, but it's a bit of a crock to go on and on about what morons or what scum conservatives are and then try and take refuge in jocularity when called out.

And you called me disingenuous?
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Oct, 2013 09:20 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

I don't want moderate office holders. I want office holders who agree with me. Mine may or may not be the moderate view for any given issue.


I couldn't agree more, but usually the ones I strongly support overall have one of those given issues to which I am totally opposed. What to do; what to do?

Yeah, that does happen a lot. Someone agrees with me on every issue except one, for which he takes a position I am rabidly opposed to.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Oct, 2013 10:47 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

roger wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

I don't want moderate office holders. I want office holders who agree with me. Mine may or may not be the moderate view for any given issue.


I couldn't agree more, but usually the ones I strongly support overall have one of those given issues
to which I am totally opposed. What to do; what to do?

Yeah, that does happen a lot. Someone agrees with me on every issue except one,
for which he takes a position I am rabidly opposed to.
Yes; it happened with Ron Paul 's incorrigible pacifism in the last election.
I supported Newt. I'd have preferred Dr. Paul, but that fanatical pacifism was a deal breaker; too dangerous.





David
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 04:50 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

C'mon Frank. I enjoy humor as much as anyone else, but it's a bit of a crock to go on and on about what morons or what scum conservatives are and then try and take refuge in jocularity when called out.


I have called conservatives morons and scum?????

I????

My guess there are morons and scum among them...just as there are among the liberals...and the moderates also. But I have not called any of them that.


Quote:


And you called me disingenuous?


Yeah...but I have not called you a moron...or scum. And I won't.

OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 05:04 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

roger wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

I don't want moderate office holders. I want office holders who agree with me.
Mine may or may not be the moderate view for any given issue.


I couldn't agree more, but usually the ones I strongly support overall
have one of those given issues to which I am totally opposed. What to do; what to do?
Yeah, that does happen a lot. Someone agrees with me on every issue except one,
for which he takes a position I am rabidly opposed to.
Brandon, I refuse to believe that u have rabies; (not even 1 rabie).





David
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 05:11 am
Let's be clear on the terminology here. The Post is talking about a TOP TWO primary. That is NOT an open primary, as the headline says. There are several varieties of open primary, but generally they describe a system where voters of any party can vote to elect the candidate for a particular party. In 08 in TX, which has one kind of openprimary, a lot of Republicans voted in the Democratic primary for Obama, because they thought he'd be a pushover compared to Hillary. That didn't work particularly well for them, though it did for the country. I'm not sure a top two primary wouldn't end up with a Tea Party candidate versus a regular conservative in the general election, in deep-red states, which would be only marginally better.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 05:40 am
@Frank Apisa,
One last thought on that, Finn.

90% (more actually) of my closest friends, acquaintances, and relatives are all conservatives...with most being far-right conservatives.

The people I work with, all retired white men in their late 60's-70's...working in one of the Reddest (Top Ten richest) counties in the nation...are conservatives. (This country, Somerset, is run entirely by Republicans.)

My friends also are older than average...and conservative right down the line. I do not even have a moderate (let alone liberal) golfing partner...and I partner with two dozen regular golfers...all conservatives.

My family, except for my sister, is pure hard-line conservative...both my brothers (one now dead), all of my cousins, and with one exception all of my aunts and uncles were hard conservatives. My mother and father were also.

I love them all dearly...and respect the entire batch.

I do consider conservative policies to be deadly...and I oppose them with every fiber...and will continue to do so. But your "morons and scum" comment was way off-base.

joefromchicago
 
  4  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 07:58 am
There is some confusion regarding nomenclature here. The system described in the original article isn't, strictly speaking, an open primary. An open primary is where voters are allowed to vote for primary candidates, regardless of party affiliation. That is contrasted to a closed primary, where voters are only allowed to vote for the candidates in one party's primary.

What the author in the original article is talking about is as a "nonpartisan blanket primary" or "jungle primary." That is more akin to the two-stage process that France holds for its presidential elections (as Thomas has already noted). In this system, all candidates, of whatever political party, run in the first round. If no one receives a majority vote in the first round, then the top two finishers compete in the second round. Thus, it's possible that the top two finishers will be from the same political party.
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 10:25 am

0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 12:13 pm
There's no real evidence that nonpartisan blanket primaries (NBPs) discourage extremist candidates. Indeed, two examples suggest that NBPs encourage and reward extremists.

For a long time Louisiana has had NBPs for state and congressional elections. In 1991, David Duke, KKK'er and all-around racist, ran as a Republican in a crowded field of candidates against incumbent GOP governor Buddy Roemer and former Democratic governor and all-around crook Edwin Edwards. Duke and Edwards came out of the first round with the most votes - 32% and 34% respectively. Edwards had the plurality of the votes, even though approximately 64% of the voters wanted a Republican to win. In the second round, a lot of people held their noses and voted for the crook rather than the racist, and Edwards won 61%-39%. If Louisiana had a closed primary instead, it is likely that Duke wouldn't have even run, or, if he had, he would have lost in the GOP primary. Instead, the NBP process encouraged fringe candidates with limited but motivated constituencies, like Duke, to run in the first round, with the hope that they could draw enough votes to survive into the second round.

Likewise, in the French presidential election of 2002, xenophobic racist Jean Marie le Pen managed to go into the second round of balloting with a mere 16.8% of the vote, second only to incumbent president and accused crook Jacques Chirac's 19.8%. Chirac went on to win by a landslide in the second round, as voters of all major political stripes repudiated le Pen, but it's hard to imagine le Pen getting that far in a two-party system like the US.

And that's one of the problems with the NBP. Analysts can look at the results in Washington and California and judge them a success, because it appears that the Republicans and Democrats are getting more moderate candidates.* That, however, is largely the result of the continued predominance of the two established parties, not the NBP. As the French example shows, however, once the two-party system breaks down, that provides an opportunity to extremists of all kinds. Indeed, the Louisiana gubernatorial race of 1991 is another example: there, Duke was, in effect, running as an independent, since the Republican party disowned him. In other words, the NBP works best so long as the two-party system is intact, but the NBP, by opening up the field in the first round to all sorts of fringe candidates, poses a singular threat to that two-party system.


*And that's probably only an appearance. The NBP hasn't prevented the election of such extremists as Rep. Tom McLintock (rated 93% by the John Birch Society) or Rep. Ed Royce (73%), both members of the House Tea Party caucus.
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 12:17 pm
Seems to me that what we have would work very well if we just outlawed gerrymandering.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Oct, 2013 12:48 pm
@edgarblythe,
Yes! It would help if the parties could'nt make districts 100 miles long by 10 miles wide.
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Nov, 2013 08:36 am
@joefromchicago,
Crooks and racists, looks like a trend.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Nov, 2013 04:28 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

One last thought on that, Finn.

90% (more actually) of my closest friends, acquaintances, and relatives are all conservatives...with most being far-right conservatives.

The people I work with, all retired white men in their late 60's-70's...working in one of the Reddest (Top Ten richest) counties in the nation...are conservatives. (This country, Somerset, is run entirely by Republicans.)

My friends also are older than average...and conservative right down the line. I do not even have a moderate (let alone liberal) golfing partner...and I partner with two dozen regular golfers...all conservatives.

My family, except for my sister, is pure hard-line conservative...both my brothers (one now dead), all of my cousins, and with one exception all of my aunts and uncles were hard conservatives. My mother and father were also.

I love them all dearly...and respect the entire batch.

I do consider conservative policies to be deadly...and I oppose them with every fiber...and will continue to do so. But your "morons and scum" comment was way off-base.



Whatever
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Nov, 2013 04:34 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

Seems to me that what we have would work very well if we just outlawed gerrymandering.


You, clearly, have absolutely no idea of the actual effect of gerrymandering.

I don't fault you for this (since I was similarly ignorant) but you have madea an ass out of yourself because a post you have "ignored" proved your assertion to be bullsh*t.

Don't peek eddy!
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Nov, 2013 05:01 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Dear Finnsey. Would repost the post you posted so I can also educate myself as to the post you posted? I dont want to be an ass like Edgar. I would rather be an ass like you. So please repost your post.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/15/2019 at 11:54:37