Home

Join

Main Menu



blog advertising is good for you

Links

Like IB

Primary Colors

A friend of mine who I can best describe as “Democrat leaning” was lamenting the other day about how he really didn’t have any choices in the upcoming May 8 primary.

So I told him if he was bored with his own party maybe he should go where the action is and look at the GOP primary.   Lugar v. Mourdock is the hottest political ticket in town these days and up until a few days ago Indiana was on the verge of having another presidential primary that mattered.

My buddy told me he would get back with me, but he did give me some food for thought. Why do we have primaries anyway? What’s the point?

A political primary is basically a party function where the two main parties decide whom their nominees will be in the general election. Do we really need a primary, or in other words, a taxpayer funded private event to do this?

Why can’t Republicans and Democrats simply do their own caucus or nominating convention and then put forward the candidates they want in the general election? Is all this really necessary? Do we really need to spend money holding elections and printing ballots and hiring poll workers for what should be a private political event?

How many places in Indiana only have one person running for a particular office in a primary?  Heck even at the state level, the voters don’t pick the Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor or Superintendent of Public Instruction nominees in a primary? They are all chosen during a state party nominating convention.

Now, this is the part where someone steps up and says we need a primary system; otherwise, the party bosses will pick who the candidates will be and outsiders would never get a chance to run or participate.

My response: So what?

A political nominating process is a private event. Let the two parties go out and recruit the best candidates, train them, give them resources and then present them to the voters. Why is this a bad thing?

However, if you must insist on a primary in hopes of keeping the flames of democracy alive and kicking, might I suggest a consolidated primary? It’s something done in my home state of Illinois for municipal elections.

Yeah, yeah I know. Mentioning Illinois and elections may not seem like the brightest thing, but hear me out on this one. During municipal elections, there are no Republican or Democratic ballots, just the individuals who are running for an office are listed, usually in the order that they filed. No one is identified by party. You go in and vote and the top two vote getters face each other in a runoff – unless one gets more than 50 percent of the vote.

The other nice thing about an Illinois consolidated primary is that if there is a runoff, the general election is held a few weeks later so voters don’t have endure a long, drawn out and at times, ridiculous, campaign season.

I think my buddy would be much more excited about a primary like this than the one we have now. In fact, I think a lot of people would.

  • Deeannch

    I agree wholeheartedly that on the local or municipal level Indiana needs to get the partisanship out of the process. There is no good reason to list someone as a Democrat or Republican for a local office. I moved here from Texas where the state pretty much stays out of the hair of local politics and there are no partisan elections at the local level. I like it much better that way. All it seems to do is divide people more and allow for more “good ol’ boy” politicking. There are a lot of people who would make good town council members who don’t want to get involved in their local political parties. And I see no good reason to make them jump through that political hoop. Plus in places like Hendricks county, where I live, you have primaries in May, and generally no Democratic challengers, so there are 7 months where you know the results of the election, but you just have to wait until the general election is over. 

  • Nick

    The major point you missed is that these are PUBLIC, not private parties. Yes there is a lot of insider stuff going on, however, primaries open the process and allow general revolts to the establishment.

    The key is to have an informed public participate.

  • Pogden297

    Nick is exactly right.  Anyone who watches the corrrupt slating process in Marion County should fear having that process become a substitute for a primary.  Right now slating is attended mostly by appointees of the county chairmen, not mainline party workers.    That’s why we don’t have slating contests anymore…candidates know they are rigged before they even begin.

  • M Theory

    I used to resent tax dollars to pay for the primary elections, however, in light of what I’ve learned about dirty party politics, I’m happy to pay so that I can vote for people like Mourdock and Ogden.

    Hopefully there is enough grassroots type people paying attention that we can get some good guys in.

  • Dave

    The parties have become mortuaries for enthusiasm or participation & monuments to principles buried long ago.

  • cynical sam

    But that requires waking them up first.

  • cynical sam

    Primary???
    Primary???

    We don’ need no stinkin’ primary, Senor.

  • Pascal

    Pascal believes that he will soon discover what a Republican primary ballot looks like for the first time in his voting life.  I suspect that more than a few Democrat pragmatic sorts who know how the Senate works will also.  Voting for Dick Lugar is not exactly a partisan thing for long time Democrats to do-most have voted for him in the past.  The dumber and dead headed D’s who are bringing in Nancy Pelosi for their speaker are going to sink John Gregg before he even gets into the boat.  Conservative Democrats are whole lot better for Indiana than liberal Republicans but the former are not going to vote for San Franscisco Liberal values held by a fallen away Catholic former Speaker of the House, wild spending, obamacare and worse supporter.  Any more botox on that gal and her eyes will pop out.  Nothing against Mr Mourdock but a junior senator will be of no more use than Evan Bayh was.

  • Avigdor

    except how do we know whether someone is a leftist or is conservative?  We already have problems with school boards where you do not know what you are getting and where we often have those who want a fascist (progressive) form of government being elected.

  • Avigdor

    At the county level precinct committee people would be the nominating council.  They would then select those who would be the delegates to the state convention.

    We then could have an open primary (many southern states have this already) where the slated candidates of both parties run plus anyone else who wants to run without party support.  If no one gets 51% then there is a run off election (general election) between the two top candidates.

  • cynical sam

    I, for one, do not paricularly care if a senator is junior, senior or still in puberty.  I place greater emphasis on if they are honest and have a spine.  I would not think that is too much to ask, but the last example I have seen was in the late 50′s.

  • Think Again

    And we have problems with folks mis-identifying groups of other folks: i.e., facist=progressive.  Good God.

  • Think Again

    Southern States==NOT an example of What’s Good To Do vote-wise.  

  • Nick

    The primaries are the election in Carmel and South Bend.

  • Rico

    And who is, by your estimation, Yoda?  New York, California, Illinois….?  Give me a freakin’ break!

  • Dave

    Some might find it interesting that Hitler reportedly fancied himself as a “progressive.”

  • Think Again

    So did Ronald Reagan during his gubernatorial campaign.  Repeatedly.   

  • Think Again

    Very few, to be honest.  Voter suppression is the rule of the day, here, in most southern states, and too many other places.  We seem to relish in tamping-down the voter turnout.  

  • Rico

    By asking for an ID?? What a joke!  Why don’t you just say that democrats (the ones crying about it) are too stupid, lazy, or ignorant to get a photo ID to vote? It’s obvious the dems just want to cheat!  Barry supporters don’t mind getting an ID to pick up a forty at 500 liquors. So why is it so hard to get one to vote?

  • Dave

    Definitional clues might exist in very different outcomes.

  • MacReady

    No.  When this went to court the anti-Voter ID people lost because they could not provide ONE person who would be disenfranchised.

    And the person they picked to name as the primary affiant in the suit, if I recall correctly, was found to have worked at the BMV.

    Furthermore, the driving force behind Voter ID in Rhode Island was a minority Democrat.  Since when has “voting integrity” had multiple meanings?

  • Sheri2names

    I lived in Louisiana, which also had everybody-in-a-bucket elections. It had runoffs if no candidate got 50 percent. The results? People knew they got a do-over, which resulted in such luminous runoffs as Edwin Edwards vs. David Duke. And if you hold the notion that such elections would yield higher quality candidates, think again: Illinois and Louisiana political figures are known as some of the nation’s most corrupt. No thanks.

  • Think Again

    It’s just a word, Dave.  Demonize it all you want.  

  • Think Again

    You’re pathetic. But kinda funny.

  • Dave

    ? Demonize… Hitler?  

  • Rico

    Pathetically right! Absolutely NOBODY is disenfranchised by being asked for his  freaking identification before he CHOOSES to make the most profoundly democratic decision he can make as an American!  STFU!!!!!

  • Pascal

    Pascal is still being carded at Super Target when he tries to purchase wines.