Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Thunderbeast

(3,536 posts)
Sat Feb 20, 2016, 08:47 PM Feb 2016

Isn't it time we reform the primary process?

It is time to re-introduce democracy to the elections process! There are many reforms that would re-connect voters to a process that has disenfranchised millions through structural bias and misplaced worship of "tradition".

Why does Iowa and New Hampshire claim a divine right to wean the candidate pool for each party before the rest of the country has any input to the process? Maybe California and Oregon would have been big states for Martin O'Malley or Chris Christie. We will never know how they would fare, because the nominations will likely be sewn up before the May and June primaries. The Pacific coast states have not been consequential in the nominating process since 1968 when Gen McCarthy won Oregon and Bobby Kennedy won California (only to be murdered after leaving the podium from his victory speech).

Rotating regional primaries (maybe six to eight of them) would allow candidates to address specific issues of interest to different parts of the country. Each election cycle, the order of regions would change, giving no geographic cohort a permanent advantage in the process.

Presidential candidates would be selected by parties (the more the better) for a face-off in November. Elections for state-wide offices could move to a top-two primary. This would allow new parties to compete for a place on the general election ballot. Should a candidate win a majority in the primary, they would be elected in the primary. If two candidates from the same party finish first and second, they would face the runoff. The parties HATE this idea. They want to maintain control. TOO BAD!

For the life of me, I can not understand the idiocy of people lining up for blocks to vote a a physical polling place. I clearly have a bias from living in Oregon where ther have not been polling places for many years. Vote by mail works. My ballot is placed in a signed "SECRECY ENVELOPE". My signature is compared to the signature from my registration to assure validity. There is virtually NO ELECTION FRAUD using this process. There are paper ballots that remain in the custody of elections officials in case of a recount. There are no voting machines distributed to neighborhoods where they are at risk of tampering.

The elections process itself has become a hinderence to engaging the electorate in ownership in their democracy. When people don't believe that their votes matter, they are likely to stay home. Let's fix it!

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Isn't it time we reform the primary process? (Original Post) Thunderbeast Feb 2016 OP
People don't show up if they don't get enough choices. SaveTheMackerel Feb 2016 #1
 

SaveTheMackerel

(37 posts)
1. People don't show up if they don't get enough choices.
Sat Feb 20, 2016, 11:51 PM
Feb 2016

Most who don't vote say their vote does not matter since the powers that be make the decisions.

Others don't vote if they think the two parties are the same.

Democrats and Republicans divide the pie, and then the independent voters pick which half they want.


Other people just can't get to the polls.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Election Reform»Isn't it time we reform t...