Dynasty Party Politics in Cali. This is how far it has gone..

[flacaltenn]

BTW -- their 1st version of this law was ruled unconstitutional. The 2nd we defeated as an initiative. The 1st version tried to include the PRESIDENTIAL race and other municipal races as well.

So with 10 republican candidates and 2 dem candidate like we just had -- it was clear that in a state in like Cali the party running the MOST CHOICES and most DIVERSE OPINIONS would get creamed in a "homogenized" primary. The minority vote would ALWAYS split and ruin that party's ballot.

So the REST of the country gets a wealth of choices to pick as Repubs and Cali just dilutes and FLUSHES all of the choices before the general.

 

[flacaltenn]

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Sorry, but that is a HORRIBLE analogy. Anyone that drinks soda knows you are either a coke or a Pepsi person. They are NOt interchangeable.

It's NOT a horrible analogy if I drive up to A&W ask for a root beer and they ask if I want Coke or Pepsi. You know --- some folks are Yoohoo people. End result is STILL ONE PARTY DOMINATION. And they made it sadisticly harder for dissident voices to be heard..

But, you are forced to buy either a Coke or Pepsi based on what they carry because they have non-compete clauses. In these elections there aren't non-compete clauses... they all have a chance starting in the primaries.

What is with all these junk food analogies? You really equate a precise citizen right with fizzy drinks?

 

[Kosh]

BTW -- their 1st version of this law was ruled unconstitutional. The 2nd we defeated as an initiative. The 1st version tried to include the PRESIDENTIAL race and other municipal races as well.

So with 10 republican candidates and 2 dem candidate like we just had -- it was clear that in a state in like Cali the party running the MOST CHOICES and most DIVERSE OPINIONS would get creamed in a "homogenized" primary. The minority vote would ALWAYS split and ruin that party's ballot.

So the REST of the country gets a wealth of choices to pick as Repubs and Cali just dilutes and FLUSHES all of the choices before the general.

Open Primary System for Voter-Nominated Offices
Under this system:

• All candidates for a voter-nominated office are listed on the same ballot, regardless of the candidates’ party preferences, and
• Any voter may vote for any candidate, regardless of the voter’s party preference.

For example, for a voter-nominated office, a voter who indicated a preference for the Democratic Party when he or she registered may vote for a candidate whose preference is for the Republican Party.

Previously known as partisan offices, the voter-nominated offices are the state legislative offices, U.S. congressional offices, and state constitutional offices. For the June primary election, all voters, regardless of their party preference, can vote for the following voter-nominated offices:

• United States Senator
• United States Representative in Congress
• State Senator
• Member of the State Assembly

The two candidates who receive the most votes in the June primary election move on to the November general election, regardless of vote totals. This means that:

• The two candidates who get the most votes for a voter-nominated office in the June primary election may have the same party preference (i.e., in the November general election, both candidates listed on the ballot for a voter-nominated office may have a preference for the Democratic Party).
• Even if one candidate receives a majority of the votes (50 percent + 1) in the June primary election, he or she must run in the November general election against the candidate with the next-highest number of votes.
• If there are only two candidates running in the June primary election for a voter-nominated office, a November general election is still required for that office.
• A write-in candidate running in the June primary election can move on to the November general election only if he or she is one of the top two vote-getters in the June primary election.

Primary Elections in California | Department of Elections

 

[flacaltenn]

Who was trying to blow smoke and call the Sanchez -- Harris race "hotly contested". It was cake-walk for the party favorite. You KNOW the results dontcha -- and yet these words just come out of your mouth. It was THEATER.. There WAS no General Election in California for Senate.. .

 

[Lewdog]

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Sorry, but that is a HORRIBLE analogy. Anyone that drinks soda knows you are either a coke or a Pepsi person. They are NOt interchangeable.

It's NOT a horrible analogy if I drive up to A&W ask for a root beer and they ask if I want Coke or Pepsi. You know --- some folks are Yoohoo people. End result is STILL ONE PARTY DOMINATION. And they made it sadisticly harder for dissident voices to be heard..

But, you are forced to buy either a Coke or Pepsi based on what they carry because they have non-compete clauses. In these elections there aren't non-compete clauses... they all have a chance starting in the primaries.

What is with all these junk food analogies? You really equate a precise citizen right with fizzy drinks?

Because it makes it simple for people to understand. Not everyone studies government, but everyone goes to Fast Food joints.

Anyone in my classes always ask me for help, and many ask me if I'm going to be a teacher some day. Hell the other day some girl in one of my courses came up to me to thank me for the comments I make in class. The professors on the other hand... one made a comment last week about a comment I made. It was my Criminal Justice statistics course. A girl said one of the questions on her survey had to do with asking people when they thought a person should get the death penalty, and she had 6 answers. Misdemeanor, Felony A, Felony B, Felony C, Felony D, Felony E. I made a comment about what if the person taking the survey doesn't know what each felony level is. The professor agreed that could make things difficult, but since we aren't actually having people do the surveys and doing them ourselves it wouldn't matter. I then latter made a comment that if I was going to bring up a problem with her survey, I should at least give a possible solution, so not to be an asshole. I said maybe she should put in parenthesis next to each felony class a few examples. The professor said that was a good idea and that is probably what she SHOULD do... but again it isn't necessary for this assignment, and that maybe someday I can be a professor and tell students what to do.

Yeah... several people told me they thought he was being a dick when all I was doing was trying to help the girl.

 

[flacaltenn]

In fact -- it's so obvious how as a party you "GAME" this system. We figured it out in the LParty while we were fighting the ballot proposition. As a party --- to survive a TOP TWO primary, you do backroom deals, go back to the "smoke filled rooms" and run just ONE candidate in such a farce of a Primary. Take ALL the voter's decisions away from them. Have ONE candidate --- so that they don't split the party vote.

Now --- that's a primary anymore is it? That's not letting the party PARTISANS choose from a broad field of candidates. --- but that's how STUPID this entire law is... Any party that offers up a full slate of diverse choices in a farce like that are idiots...