How California could keep Democrats from winning the House

[lordsummerisle]

Ian Millhiser, ThinkProgress

A poll conducted by Democrats interested in taking control of the U.S. House seat currently held by retiring Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) finds that voters prefer a Democratic candidate to a Republican by 7 points. Nevertheless, Democrats could lose this seat thanks to the unusual way that California conducts elections.

Rather than selecting candidates in party primaries, who then face off against each other in a general election, California uses a “jungle primary” system. According to this system, all candidates for an office square off in one grand primary regardless of their partisan affiliation; then, the two candidates who receive the most votes in the first round compete in a runoff during the general election.

https://thinkprogress.org/republicans-control-house-california-elects-lawmakers-329010009038/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[wasupaloopa]

1. Our jungle primary has given us a total Dem government in CA.

[FarCenter]

4. I thought that the jungle primary was the way to establish a single-party democracy in CA

[California_Republic]

10. In the strong dem areas two Dems run against each other

[rufus dog]

2. District 45 could have the same problem

But I predict both of them will have a Dem running against the Repuke, and the Dems will win one if not both.

[rogerashton]

3. A similar -- slightly less crazy --

system in Louisiana led to the 1992 runoff between Edwin Edwards (under inditement for corruption) and David Duke. The "jungle primary" probably works on the average, but can give rise to some pretty strange results.

[still_one]

5. It was voted on by the people in California Proposition 14, and became law in 2011. It ISN'T a

"jungle" system as the OPs article suggests, but allows the top two candidates regardless of party to advance to the general election. The Presidential election is exempt.

Personally I am not a fan of it because I believe that political parties should choose the candidates that will run in a general election, not independents or those NOTassociated with political parties.

[David__77]

6. I support this law.

Except I think that I would go further and prevent candidates from being designated by party. I think parties can make their own endorsements outside the government-supported electoral process, if they wish.

[California_Republic]

9. Agreed. It brings the moderates forward

[Codeine]

7. Its not a systemic fault,

but rather a party failing. The party needs to be willing to play a little strong arm now and then; bust heads to keep a shit-ton of candidates running under the party banner in any given district. They can give folks a few months to establish themselves and then tell the bottom-feeders to gtfo and let the leading candidates duke it out.

[California_Republic]

8. Its not called jungle primary out here