Politico has this lengthy article about the California U.S. Senate race, and the future of the top-two system.
The article quotes Abel Maldonado, one of the fathers of the system in California. He seems to now accept the idea that Republicans will never have a chance at winning a statewide race in California, and celebrates the fact that Republicans are permitted to choose between two Democrats. Yet Republicans won gubernatorial races in California in 1982, 1986, 1990, 1994, 2003, and 2006, before there was a top-two primary.
It isn’t just the Republican Party. A few more election cycles of “Top Two” and there won’t be much of anything left of ANY OTHER political party in California. If they are going to make like the old Soviet Union they should at least give us the option to vote “NO”
Bob M.. Cali has an open amendment process; so it could easily be changed through a petition. Just need somebody to bank roll the effort.
“It isn’t just the Republican Party. A few more election cycles of “Top Two” and there won’t be much of anything left of ANY OTHER political party in California.”
No other party besides the Republicans exists now outside of some Greens in San Francisco.
I have to agree with the proponents of the law. If anything it will drive actual policy discussion as opposed to people blindly voting for a party because the electorate is full of idiots that vote for parties instead of individuals. The current political primary system used by most of the country is beyond broken. So “leave things as they are” is not an option.
And Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
Nixon and Reagan winning statewide elections in California occurred before I was born. In the meantime, the demographics and political geography of the state have changed massively.
I like to see the Libertarian party run in 2018 John Larroquette who played Dan Fielding in Night Court for Governor as there official candidate.In 96 he did support Harry Browne and promoted his campaign on the tonight show with Jay Leno.
If you are a Libertarian who do you want to see run for Governor in 2018.Its ashamable Long time Libertarian activist Jim Ryder a few years ago became a registered Republican.He ran For Governor and some non partisan county office on Sandiego county.He also was in a successful lawsuit over public funding of stadiums in Sandiego.You noticed the Nfl will not consider Sandiego for the super bowl thanks to people like Jim Ryder.I always thought the Sandiego county Libertarians had something going.I was a one time member of the Region Libertarian party that Sandiego county is in.Now iam not so sure anymore.Maybe there is hope for the Orange county Libertarians despite the fact a former party chair was supporting Republicans and Later joined the Republican party and bought the website Libertarian Republican which Eric Dondero.Writes articles for.Remember when Dondero.was a member of the Libertarians National committee and Supported Ron Paul before he turned against him.
Again – how soon before ONLY communist Donkeys in CA eating each other — after ALL other folks have died or moved out ???
See the ex-USSR regime — dead in 1991 after INSANE economics for decades and decades.
rj wrote : “No other party besides the Republicans exists now outside of some Greens in San Francisco.”
I wouldn’t say that. As a matter of fact the Greens are so small to be considered one of the two prime candidates to fall off the ballot. After “Primary Realignment” (read bottom of the Flakey Cycle) Peace & Freedom had 70,000 registrants, the Greens had 76,000. IIRC the Libertarians were around 110,000 (don’t hold me to that Richard), AIP was just under half a million. The qualification requirement as it stood for this election was 59,000. With the increased registration for this election the qualification point should raise somewhere in the mid to upper 60,000s. The 2018 Governor’s Race in California will be for an open seat that will drive registration up even higher so the party qualification limit could well be in the mid 70,000s by time 2020 rolls around.
rj wrote : “I have to agree with the proponents of the law. If anything it will drive actual policy discussion as opposed to people blindly voting for a party because the electorate is full of idiots that vote for parties instead of individuals.”
I have to disagree with you on two counts there. First the voter group that is showing the highest rate of growth in California are those registering “Decline to State”. In 1992 DtS represented 5% of the registered voters in the state today its almost 25%. (24 and change to be exact)
Yes there is somewhat of a Donkey pattern in Party Affiliation selection. I think it is way to easy to check a box to declare affiliation. But if we implemented requirements to take and pass political knowledge tests all with requiring some form of public service requirement in the political party one wishes to join that would send party registration plummeting to single digits. But more important you are confining the breadth of discussion and political debate to selected party affiliation. Yes political is quite narrow these days but the mechanisms limiting that discussion are more numerous than rigid self identification with a particular party.
Actually going to a single party in a state could limit discussion further and invite hideous corruption. With only one party rigging the Primaries, or should I say Primary, by party hacks will be a snap. Money will flow to the Party Apparatus rather than the candidates. Do you think that will open up debate and widen discussion ?
The situation is far more complex than you think.
rj wrote : “The current political primary system used by most of the country is beyond broken. So “leave things as they are” is not an option.”
That is out of the frying pan and into the fire thinking.
Richard Winger how can California get away with its rules in the top 2 primary. It violates a court case on the Louisiana top two system.