The California Assembly vote in the June 5 primary in the 6th district was: incumbent Republican Beth B. Gaines 38,827; Republican Andy Pugno 33,382; Democrat Regy Bronner 32,573. Because of California’s top-two open primary rules, the only two candidates who can run in November are the two Republicans. Both are conservative. See this story, focusing on the fact that Pugno had said before the primary that if the top two vote-getters were Gaines and himself, and that if Gaines received more votes, he would not campaign in November. Now it appears he will campaign.
Supporters of top-two would say this outcome is good for Democrats, because now they have the privilege of helping decide which Republican gets elected.
Having New Age election law MORONS write *reforms* is like having the Titanic MORONS going full speed on a no moon night in a known iceberg zone.
Top 2 = 2 extremists nominated in each gerrymander district.
—-
REAL reforms —
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
NO lunatic primaries.
ONE election day.
The outcome is good for voters because all voters now have the right to choose between the two candidates who had the most support.
Top Two is doing exactly what it was intended to do, which is squashing choice during the general election.
#3 In that particular district, it moved the effective choice to the whole electorate in the general election, rather than being decided in the Republican primary.
There is a 49%-28% Republican registration advantage.
There was a special election for that district in which one Democrat and seven Republicans filed. And the new district is 3% more Republican than the old.
The interesting thing about the district is the incumbent assemblywoman is the wife of a senator (he was elected in a special senate election, and then she was elected in the special assembly race to replace him). There could be some anti-nepotism voting.
@3 Single winner districts is what squashes choice, not top two compared to top one in single winner districts.
Tired of chasing your OWN tail? Try pure proportional representation – districts of two or more, the more the better!
Suing your way may be a good alternative to teamwork and unity in some cases, but who decides?
–James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
http://www.usparliament.org/votehere.php
“Why do you THINK they called it Google?”
#7, please tell us why they call it Google.
@7 The parliament was founded in Usenet in 1995, after I had run for Gov of California in 1994, campaigned live in Usenet on state voting reform through pure proportional representation and started the parliament’s elections;
http://www.usparliament.org
In 1995, the “First USA Parliament” was elected through my efforts, and approx. 350 voters elected 100 names from a choice of 125 names categorized in 25 different parties/categories. Harry Browne [Libertarian] was #1, Colin Powell [Independent] #2, Noam Chomsky [New] #3, etc.
In October 1997, the USA Parliament, being a large ball of interactive activity in Usenet (before the web was big) because of the six-month election cycles, the founder of Google.com Sergie Brin picked up the activity in Usenet with his then no-name search engine and joined the conversation by asking “What is a joogle?” (My email address for posting was joogle@netcom.com and he was asking about me)
Someone replied; “I don’t know what a joogle is, but a google is a number.”
One week later, Sergie Brin announced the founding of Google.com, in the presense of the parliament’s supporters and detractors…Cameron Spitzer, Gary Swing, Hank Chapot, etc., and they all enjoined the search engine, tested it etc.,
Because of that moment, googol the number mis-spelled, and my name “Go Ogle” became a multi-billion dollar gateway, because of my logo “joogle” i.e. James Orlando Ogle = joogle.
Richard… you had to ask!
# 8 How about add the info to the Googol and Google wikis for the world to see forever [so you do NOT repeat it here again for about a Googol number of years] ???
——–
How many LAWS has the U.S.A. Parliament enacted having ANY effect on the U.S.A. government ???
— with its 3 EVIL ANTI-Democracy minority rule election systems –
H. Reps., Senate, Electoral College.
—-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.