See here for an outstanding article that explains the various types of primary used in U.S. history, with a special emphasis on Mississippi. The author, Steve Rankin, has become one of the nation’s leading experts on partisan primary elections.
See here for an outstanding article that explains the various types of primary used in U.S. history, with a special emphasis on Mississippi. The author, Steve Rankin, has become one of the nation’s leading experts on partisan primary elections.
Hmm. I was confused through much of post because I come from an open primary state. I would support an “open primary” if it was IRV /STV based.
While I strongly agree with the Scalia comment I fail to see why government should have any business running that process. Let parties as private organizations select their members as they choose. If they’d like to send out ballots through the mail or have caucuses, so be it. It in the end is no business of government.
An IRV / STV style general election (no primaries) will in the end strengthen not weaken political parties. Rather than having an intra multi party system we will have an inter multi political party system. Rather than the political breadth occurring in the primary process, it will do so in the general election. With an IRV /STV process they will be no spoiler effect nor voting for the evil of two two lessors. Unlike the “open primary” there would be clear disadvantage for parties running more than one candidate, but at the same time no disadvantage for multiple political parties..