On Jan 30, 3:30�am, "Jim" wrote:


Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:30�am, "Jim" wrote:

Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.


On the other hand, I believe in closed primaries, and, to take it a step
further, I believe in voting-booth primaries only, not caucuses. Voters
should be able to decide on their own, in the privacy of a voting booth,
who they want to support.

Independents should be able to vote in primaries, too, but only to
indicate a preference, not to pick a party's candidate.

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:30�am, "Jim" wrote:

Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political
party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.


On the other hand, I believe in closed primaries, and, to take it a step
further, I believe in voting-booth primaries only, not caucuses. Voters
should be able to decide on their own, in the privacy of a voting booth,
who they want to support.

Independents should be able to vote in primaries, too, but only to
indicate a preference, not to pick a party's candidate.

Harry,
Did anyone ask you what you prefer?

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 3:30?am, "Jim" wrote:


Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.

The Primary elections are only part picking a party candidate. Also the
laws, bond issues etc. that affect the state are also voted on. If you are
not a Registered Democrat, why should you get to vote on who you want to
represent the Democrat club in the big show? Is the way most of the states
have set up their picking of the candidates for President. It is up to the
states to pick how they pick a candidate for POTUS. Read that last
statement again. At one time it was the state Legislatures who submitted
the candidate. But the people wanted a say and the Founding Fathers left it
up to the state on how they pick a candidate.

The Constitution does not grant anyone a right to vote. Period.


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 3:30?am, "Jim" wrote:


Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political
party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the
selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.

The Primary elections are only part picking a party candidate. Also
the laws, bond issues etc. that affect the state are also voted on.
If you are not a Registered Democrat, why should you get to vote on
who you want to represent the Democrat club in the big show? Is the
way most of the states have set up their picking of the candidates for
President. It is up to the states to pick how they pick a candidate
for POTUS. Read that last statement again. At one time it was the
state Legislatures who submitted the candidate. But the people wanted
a say and the Founding Fathers left it up to the state on how they
pick a candidate.