Los Angeles Times Carries Op-Ed on How Top-Two Primaries Limit Voter Choice in November

Keith Smith, an assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of the Pacific, has this op-ed about California’s top-two open primary. The main focus is on how it has shrunk voter choice in November elections for Congress and state office.


Comments

Los Angeles Times Carries Op-Ed on How Top-Two Primaries Limit Voter Choice in November — 4 Comments

  1. It is the intent of “Top-two” and its fascist-socialist supporters and lickspittles to limit choices and end free elections in America.

    “Top-two” creates a single party with a single primary. This single party will then control the entire electoral process and be, in turn, controlled by the state.

    If you have ever thought that party insiders have a lot of influence within some party, so you’ve had to leave and join or even start a new party, or support or run as an independent, imagine the US when there is only one party on the ballot in every election with its single primary and no others are allowed.

    That is the evil system being supported by Jim Riley et al.

    Their vision of America as an easy to control, single-party state, with a single primary, where the dominant powers can exercise total control without surprises, should terrify everyone.

    “Top-two” must be stopped and repealed where it has been inacted. Its supporters should be exposed and removed from all public offices and positions of influence.

  2. Jim @ #1 – it was not so much dishonest as unclear or incomplete. The Secretary of State has indicated that since there are no party primaries, that all candidates regardless of party must collect the same number of signarures – which is much higher than what Libertarian or Green or other third party candidates formerly had to collect.

    The incomplete (or, in your words, dishonest) part is that the writer did not indicate that third party and other candidates can collect in-lieu signatures from any voter, regardless of party registration.

    It is misleading even if not intentionally dishonest.

  3. The number of in lieu of signatures is comparable to that for supervisor in larger counties.

    The California Constitution forbids privileged classes of candidates or voters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.