open vs closed primaries vs causus

[45-70.gov]

in  Florida  we have closed primaries


the democrats have no say in the republican primaries  and  visa versa


georgia  is open primaries.........remeber  rush limbaugh  and ''operation  kaos''
                                         one party nominates a looser for the other candidate
                                        then easily win the general election...leading to lesser of 2 evils again


caucus???...this one looses me
.....some one from a caucus state  chime  in


this country is in trouble....and  many have as their plan...to vote  in 2016 for the best man
they  will  miss  out on at least  THREE  MORE OPPERTUNITIES TO BE HEARD
2014  midterm primaries  where they  hopefully give us some good choices and
2014  midterm general election  where they vote  out the democrats...[clearing the way for a 3rd]
2016  primaries......if your in a stae  make sure your registered
2016.....i hope i get to vote for rand paul OR RUBIO..
...but will stand by any one that can beat HILERY....and  no  3rd  party will  win

[BAGTIC]

Open primaries assure that the two most popular candidates compete against one another. In some states if any candidate wins primary with more than 50% of the vote they automatically win the election. If not the two highest compete in the general election. Makes sense to me. We are supposed to be electing candidates, not political parties. Many of the founders were very outspoken in their opposition to the creation of political parties predicting that partisan politics woulds be the ruination of the nation. They were very prescient for it has come true.
Political parties are private social clubs who first allegiance is to the Party itself, not the people or the nation. Their goal is victory, power, and control at any cost. To the victor belongs the spoils. Damn them all.
The next great threat comes from political careerism where our representatives are more commited to their careers and reelection than to the welfare of the people. They will do and say anything to get reelected. There should be a red lantern hanging over the entrance to Congress announcing it for what it is, the largest whorehouse in the country where virtue is bought and sold to the highest bidder. Damn them all.
The People in this country deserve public elections, not partisan wheeling & dealing. We need candidates representative of the people, not the special interests. We need term limits. When this country began it had four million people and was able to find sufficient qualified legislators to staff the Congress. Today we have three hundred twenty million people and we can't find enough qualified people will to serve one term serving their country without reelecting the same unindicted conspirators term after term. That is what the encumbents want us to believe. Balderdash. Fire them all.
I suggest a single six year term for all of them from Representative through President might be a good place to start.

[Oldshooter]

All I know is that primaries should be on the same day everywhere. The Texas primary was so late that the candidates were virtually picked before our primary happened. 

[45-70.gov]

All I know is that primaries should be on the same day everywhere. The Texas primary was so late that the candidates were virtually picked before our primary happened. 

you are sure   correct about that


the parties derive  power over the whole country by controlling a few states

[BAGTIC]

The candidates only goal is to win. That is why they don't bother to even campaign in states where they know they don't have any chance of either winning or losing. It is a waste of time and money.
Where in the Constitution does it same anything about 'primary elections'? The founders never intended that there should be primary elections.
As the country grew so large and populous it has became both financially and physically impossible for any candidate to simultaneously campaign in every state. That is why the Electoral College was created. The idea was that voters in each state would vote for local people whose judgement and integrity they trusted to serve as electors. The Electors would then select a President and Vice-President. This is a little like the election of a new Pope where Cardinals from all over would come together representing their followers and select a new leader based on that candidates reputation, past accomplishments, policies, etc.
This system has since been corrupted by many States requiring that the Electors declare for a specific candidate prior to election and being bound to that position. In effect those chosen "to elect" are being told how to vote. That was not the original intent and in case of a tie or stalemate they do not have the flexibility to negotiate a viable coalition. What function is filled by Electors who are not free to elect? Remember that under the Constitution the United States is a federation of sovereign states and it is the states, not the public, who are electing a leader. To repudiate that principle would require repudiating the principle of 'State's Rights' so near and dear to the hearts of many.

[45-70.gov]

no   party gets  ANY  electoral votes  put republicans or democrats


so any other vote is wasted


1976  i think was the last faithless elector

[BAGTIC]

Only Democrats and Republicans get any electoral college votes because they are the only ones who win any elections. How many states have Libertarian Governors, or Libertarian legislatures?

[45-70.gov]

the primary system  is the root of the oor choices in the general election
and  generally poor choices