Open Season?
California has joined an increasing number of states that now have some form of open primaries that do not require voters to be affiliated with a political party to vote for partisan candidates.
Do you favor the open primary system or should voters have to declare an affiliation in order to vote in a primary?
Comments
1. Cyn said...
I say that to prevent the foolishness that happened in South Carolina,primaries should be closed to party members.
3. Biz said...
Here come the conspiracy theorists. The Dems picked a loser and they wanna "throw him back in" It doesnt work like that.Don't hate the playa,hate the game!
5. Barry said...
Biz,if you are talking about South Carolina,there is no conspiracy.The system was scammed.
7. Claire said...
This is an open season for attacks on the sensibilities of reasonable people.Primaries need to be closed in this new era of extreme politics
8. JB said...
I agree with Ted. The caucus system is grass roots,but will limit participation due to accessibility.
9. Dean said...
Closed
10. Baye+Kambui said...
I'm cool with closed primaries. Having a primary where you can vote for a candidate you will ultimately not back in November is not logical. My only caveat is that Independent voters should be able to freely participate in primaries. That also means you need lock-down periods for registering party affiliations...somewhat similar to how it's done in NY these days, although that may change...
song currently stuck in my head: "wishing you were here (joey negro remix)" - blaze
11. Ben said...
I believe in an open system.I am a true independent and have voted both Republican and Democratic.
13. Brent said...
The DEMS got played.Don't cahnge the system. the DEMS need to learn to play the game.
15. Rodney said...
Closed.Independents should wait until the general election.
16. Cedric+S.+Todmann said...
Not only should primaries be closed to registered voters who are affiliated to that particular party, America, in the name of real change, in the near future should also adopt some sort of criteria that allows voters of a particular party to reap the benefits, or downfalls of there elected officials law making decisions. For ex....If republicans don't believe in Social Security Benefits, then they should not have to pay into it, and should not be eligible for these benefits either. Then we shall see who is really working for the people.
17. paddle+foot said...
Its been chaotic for all these years, why change now.
The powers to be make a lot of money off'fa confusion.
2. James said...
Would this be an issue if the shoe was on the other foot? The Republicans would be told to suck it up.They got what they deserve.
6/14/2010