Would mandatory open primaries give us better candidates?

[Skjellyfetti]

The underlying question is still valid, should government resources be used to staff & pay for primary elections for the major parties?

The FEC leaves this up to the states.

However Illinois wants to handle it is up to Illinois. State's Rights and all that jazz.

Do you want to FEC to get more involved in policing state elections?

[JohnStOnge]

On the question posed by the thread title: No I do not think open primaries give us better candidates. Trump is exhibit A.

[UNI88]

The underlying question is still valid, should government resources be used to staff & pay for primary elections for the major parties?

The FEC leaves this up to the states.

However Illinois wants to handle it is up to Illinois. State's Rights and all that jazz.

Do you want to FEC to get more involved in policing state elections?

No, I want my county government to bill the parties for the time and cost of running their primaries for them.

[Ivytalk]

I believe in closed primaries on free association principles. Why should a person who doesn't belong to a political party have any say in the selection of that party's candidates? And there's no sign that independents have any collective brainpower or discernment that would give them any special insight into the choice of quality candidates. They're as dumb as the rest of us.

[kalm]

I believe in closed primaries on free association principles. Why should a person who doesn't belong to a political party have any say in the selection of that party's candidates? And there's no sign that independents have any collective brainpower or discernment that would give them any special insight into the choice of quality candidates. They're as dumb as the rest of us.

This sounds wonderful if you didn't have a duopoly controlling the process and the media.

A free market is a great concept when you have fair competition.

[CAA Flagship]

I believe in closed primaries on free association principles. Why should a person who doesn't belong to a political party have any say in the selection of that party's candidates? And there's no sign that independents have any collective brainpower or discernment that would give them any special insight into the choice of quality candidates. They're as dumb as the rest of us.

This sounds wonderful if you didn't have a duopoly controlling the process and the media.

A free market is a great concept when you have fair competition.

Open primaries will make it more difficult for a third major party to emerge. Too many in the top two parties to cast "negative" votes.

[kalm]

This sounds wonderful if you didn't have a duopoly controlling the process and the media.

A free market is a great concept when you have fair competition.

Open primaries will make it more difficult for a third major party to emerge. Too many in the top two parties to cast "negative" votes.

Ok...