Elspeth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 07:31 PM
Original message |
Why do we take Iowa and New Hampshire so seriously? Both states allow open primaries. |
|
The real test should be the states that only allow party members to vote in their own primaries.
|
harmonicon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 07:38 PM
Response to Original message |
1. really? I see it as the other way around. |
|
I can accept that some states, like mine, only let a voter vote in one party's primary, but I don't see why only party members should get to choose the candidates, since we live in what is practically a one or two party state. Leaving out non-members means we miss the voices of lots of voters, who, as I see it, have just as much a right to choose who their elected officials will be as do party members.
|
Elspeth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. If people want to have a voice, they should join a party and get involved |
|
If they don't care enough to do that, then why should we care what they think?
|
harmonicon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. I'm not a party member |
|
In Michigan, you're asked if you want a Democratic or Republican ballot, and that record is public. The Dems know that I vote for them, as I always do, but as far as I'm concerned being an official party member would just create more useless bureaucracy.
|
nonconformist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. Then you should also know that Dems in Michigan voted for McCain in 2000 |
|
I was there. They didn't vote for McCain because they wanted him to be president. They voted for McCain because he wasn't Bush, and it hurt Bush in the primary.
At the end of the day, it's ALL politics.
|
harmonicon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. I know they did, but it's not as simple as you lay out |
|
I think a lot of "democrats" in Michigan voted for McCain, because they did want him to be president. Scary, but true.
|
John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. Because we want their vote in Novermber? Or do you think we should restrict that also? |
WinkyDink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. They still have a "right" by being a member of a Party. Why should NON-members be allowed |
|
to vote for a specific Party's candidate?
|
harmonicon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-08-08 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. because, there are only effectively two parties |
|
Requiring membership in those parties to vote for who the candidates will be isn't much different than requiring membership in the communist party to get ahead in China. Being a member of the ruling/only party shouldn't afford one more privilege than those who are not.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 03:03 AM
Response to Original message |