If only the registered voter can vote in a primary, and the majority of them are voting entirely in one direction (right or left). Should we change it so maybe Independents can have some control who will run for the White House.
2007-02-05 13:06:05 · 6 answers · asked by apple juice 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Yes, I think the parties should change the way primaries and/or caucuses are conducted. Instead of state-by-state decisions, or arbitrary groups of states, I think there should be maybe eight regional primaries run, say, every two weeks or so in the spring of the election year. This would stop tiny, non-representative states such as New Hampshire and Iowa from having an absurdly large influence on the nominating process.
As to allowing for open voting, it has its pluses and minuses. There is always the fear that people will cross over to vote for week candidates from the other side. However, in states where this is legal, it never seems to happen. I've never heard of a situation where that actually worked. It's hard enough to get people organized and energized enough to turn out and vote for people from their own party. To get them organized to vote in large enough numbers for a weak candidate from the opposing party is almost unimaginable. And besides, it can be a Catch-22. If a supposedly weak candidate comes out of nowhere and upsets the favorite, suddenly he or she is the darling of the press.
But I agree that obviously political parties ought to be allowed to pick their candidates any way they want.
2007-02-05 13:42:14 · answer #1 · answered by ktd_73 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am an unaffiliated registered voter and I have no problem just voting for who is on the ballot in the general election. I could always re-register with a party if I wanted to vote in the primaries.
2007-02-05 13:14:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If we could vote for any party in the primaries then the republicans would vote for the biggest nightmare on the democratic ticket and vice versa. Do you really think one parties voters should be able to tamper with the possible nomination of the other parties candidate?
2007-02-05 15:30:38 · answer #3 · answered by Jeff F 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"WE" don't control the way Primary Elections work. The party that holds them controls that. What you are proposing is that Democrats could decide which Republican runs. Duh, that ain't going to happen!
In some states, certain parties do NOT even hold a Primary, they have a caucus. That means they have a meeting and decide who they are going to support.
Anyone can run for any office, within the limits specified in the Constitution of age and citizen ship. It don't get any freer than that. So the only possible value your proposal would be a negative one. Democrats (who would gladly claim to be independents) would love to nominate Mark Foley for the Republican ticket and Republicans would love to nominate Al Sharpton for the Democratic ticket.
2007-02-05 13:15:48 · answer #4 · answered by plezurgui 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
we all know voting means jack. Voting allows the Gov't keep track where you at.
2007-02-05 13:11:35 · answer #5 · answered by MOdern Man 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
why fix it if it aint broke.
2007-02-05 17:41:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋