New York GOP/ Democratic Primaries

[ultramanhyata]

A general election is open to the general public. A primary election is to determine the representative of that party. There is no reason to give non-party members a voice. You also don't get to determine the next president of the Sierra Club unless you're a member. Or the governor of a state in which you aren't a resident. Or senators of a state of which you're not a resident.

Nor are you being prevented from having a voice. In order to have as much a voice in the affairs of the club as members ... all you have to do is register as a member. Not having a voice is the price you pay for refusing to participate in the process.

If primaries are open to everyone, you are no longer selecting the nominee of that party. You're selecting the nominee of everyone, generally. We call this a "general election" and it would be better accomplished through a runoff process, if that is your actual goal.

I like how your language would imply that the US doesn't already have 20 States with open, presidential primaries. (Or are they destroying democracy??!!)

It's like pretending Europe doesn't exist and then declaring that universal healthcare, publicly funded college and paid family leave are unattainable, utopian pipe dreams. Bill Clinton shillin' for Hillary style...

 

[Quipling]

I like how your language would imply that the US doesn't already have 20 States with open, presidential primaries. (Or are they destroying democracy??!!)

It's like pretending Europe doesn't exist and then declaring that universal healthcare, publicly funded college and paid family leave are unattainable, utopian pipe dreams. Bill Clinton shillin' for Hillary style...

I've never claimed they are "destroying democracy." I think that open primaries defeat the purpose of a primary system. Some states chose to open them regardless. Believe it or not, but sometimes governments do things I disagree with. This is not a particularly difficult concept to grasp.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Try to be honest when repeating people's positions.

 

[in the]

People keep saying this but it doesn't make sense. There is ZERO reason why people would waste their time standing in line, going to a political rally, committing hours of their free time, but not take 20 minutes to vote. I'm fully confident his youth vote is showing up, but I guess everyone else in the party is just gung ho against him?

I'm mostly being a smart ass, tbh.

Of course, it's also true there is a significant portion of his fan base who can't vote.

Spoiler

And yes, I'm being a bit of a smart ass here, too.

 

[ucunc156]

Are those stats about 40% or so of the population being independents true? If thats the case, I can't agree with a closed primary in any situation. I understand the logic behind a closed primary, but if almost half the population doesn't declare a party, its pretty silly to exclude that portion of the population from deciding who will run in a general (in certain states).

Closed primaries, like voter id laws and drug testing for welfare, make sense in theory, but simply aren't practical. Again, this is assuming we want to continue to call ourselves a democracy and that the % of independents really are as high as people are quoting.

 

[Sycho Sid]

Are those stats about 40% or so of the population being independents true? If thats the case, I can't agree with a closed primary in any situation. I understand the logic behind a closed primary, but if almost half the population doesn't declare a party, its pretty silly to exclude that portion of the population from deciding who will run in a general (in certain states).

Closed primaries, like voter id laws and drug testing for welfare, make sense in theory, but simply aren't practical. Again, this is assuming we want to continue to call ourselves a democracy and that the % of independents really are as high as people are quoting.

Independent has lost most of its meaning. Most independents lean either dem or rep, they just want to avoid the label.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-sanders-does-better-with-independents/

Does a decent break down of it.

 

[ucunc156]

Oh I'm sure they do. I consider myself independent. I vote D on national levels, R on local levels. I think conservative, fiscal policies can work on small scales, like balancing a township's budget and things like that. But on national levels, republicans are too filled with fuckery for me to vote for them.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Are those stats about 40% or so of the population being independents true? If thats the case, I can't agree with a closed primary in any situation. I understand the logic behind a closed primary, but if almost half the population doesn't declare a party, its pretty silly to exclude that portion of the population from deciding who will run in a general (in certain states).

Not sure about nationally, but in NY, 27% of voters are registered independents. The point of a primary is for supporters of a party to pick who they want running, and the point of registering with a party is to vote in closed primaries. I would favor making it easier to register (moving the deadline much closer to the election than it was in NY), but I think closed primaries are a good idea in general.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Interesting.

Didn't think it deserved it's own thread and this seemed like the best choice after a quick search.