Washington State the most undemocratic democratic state has now implemented the the top two primary system. The Pick-a-Party system was much more democratic than the new Top Two system. The Democrats and the Republicans have already colluded to assure that it is either or system. The voters are always provided with a choice between bad and worse or corrupt and more currupt. However you want to slice it the two party system is bad for the voters and bad for the public. I participated in the Washington State Primaries as a Republican and saw the blatant shameless corruption first hand.
Remember the name Lisa Twing, because she needs to be exposed as corrupted. She was one of the many republican operatives running the caucus in my district like the Gastapo. She would bend the rules of the caucus to fit her agenda and fix the rules when it helped her cause. This is how it was done in Nazi Germany and it is happening right here in the good ol US of A. If you know of others that should be exposed please post and expose these people on the internet for who they really are.
August 9, 2008 at 09:55
What is your actual problem with the system. This is not to say I don’t have any.
The biggest problem is a party has no control who runs under their name or not. Any candidate running can label themselves accordingly. It actually ceases to function as a primary.
A much better solution in my view is to scrap the primary entirely and use IRV in the general election. At least then the larger percentage of voters in the general election can determine the winner. In the WA case, the top two candidates are selected by a fraction of general election voters.
August 9, 2008 at 10:34
Thanks Henry for responding.
Sure, I think that parties should be able to pick their own candidates. The problem I had with the Republican caucus, (that I was at) was how it was being manipulated and controlled to effect the outcome that certain Republicans wanted. So the whole point of the caucus was to appear to be fair. However, it was very obvious that it was a “dog and pony show.” So I didn’t disagree with the rules and the process as much as I disagreed with the people who were corrupting it. The rules should be there to create an environment that is conducive to a fair process. If the process is corrupted by individuals and organizers then any result that is reached can’t be trusted.
I actually preferred the Republican process more than the Democratic process. Because the Republicans gave 51% to the primary and 49% to the caucus indicating that the primary is more important than the caucus system. But, after going through the caucus system I trusted the results from the primary even less. I wasn’t confident that the votes were counted honestly.
I do agree that IRV could be a great solution. I am curious how it will be in reality. I hear that it is being tried in Tacoma. Hopefully, the trial is successful and we see that it will create a more democratic system where the voter has more of a choice. I’m not for a third party as much as I am against the two parties. I’m for more choice and easier ballot access. I would say the top 4 or 5 parties in the state should have free access to the ballet and included in all debates.
The problem I see is that our current system tries to dumb down the voting public. I would rather see much more civil public education and discussion. Because We need to all agree with the form of government that represents us. If we allow the two major parties to educate and form the debate, then we will continue to beat down this path.
What do you think?
August 9, 2008 at 12:27
I am a strong believer in the separation of party and state. Parties, as private organizations, should have autonomy to determine who will carry there flag. If one wants to run as an independent, that is fine, but the requirements should not be more or less difficult.
In an IRV based general election all votes are counted. With a plurality (non runoff) based election only the votes of the top two candidates are counted. In an IRV based system all voters choose the eventual winner. This video does a good job at explaining how it works.
August 11, 2008 at 15:53
Yeah, I agree that a party should be able to choose who they decide will be thier nomanie (sp?). That is why the “pick a party” system is better. It seems according to the media that Washington Voters are happy as ever with this top two system. I don’t see why. Maybe people are as stupid or ignorant or I think it could be the media trying to sell the idea that this is great. I’m not sure what to think.
I still think the Republicans and the Democrats should focus more on fixing their internal corruption and less on trying to prevent the the third parties from getting on the ballet. The voters who aren’t vested in the two parties should see this. Maybe what is needed is a good judge to step in as a modrator of each parties internal processes. There has to be some way of making these things fair. It seems the current system and parties are not able to police themselves.