In November 2018, 61% of Georgia’s legislative races have only one candidate on the ballot. There are 56 State Senate seats and 180 State House seats. From those 236 races, Democrats aren’t running anyone in 77 races, and Republicans aren’t running anyone in 67 races, for a total of 144 seats without a Democratic-Republican contest.
One independent candidate is on the ballot for State House, in a race that otherwise would have only one candidate on the ballot, so there are 143 races with only one candidate. That one independent is Nancy Stead in the 29th district.
No minor party candidates are on the ballot. The Libertarian Party nominated three state legislative candidates but none of them were able to get the required 5% petitions (approximately 1,200 signatures).
Fortunately, there is a lawsuit pending against the 5% petition requirement for U.S. House candidates, and if it wins, any improvement for U.S. House will probably also have a ripple effect for legislative races. The case, Cowen v Kemp, is pending in U.S. District Court. Discovery is underway. The decision will probably come in 2019.
Wyoming is almost as bad. 56% of state senate and house races have only one candidate.
Very few rigged gerrymander districts with under 55 percent winners in general elections.
The winner HACKS act like each got 100 percent of votes.
MUCH worse primary math – esp if no incumbent.
Elephants becoming extinct in the various West/East coast soviet socialist States
– esp. CA and MA
— something in salt water air ???
—
The HACKS got past another election in the Cowen case.
—
PR and AppV
This is why states should adopt Top 2. In areas where there is a dominant party, there is no point in putting up $400 to lose the general election for a part-time position that pays $17,000 per year. You would be better off investing the $400 in lottery tickets. At least you would have a chance to win.
If there is an incumbent, there may be a little point in challenging, even in a primary. An incumbent is an incumbent because the same voters elected him two years earlier. If they were fools to have elected him then, they are likely to repeat their mistake. If there is an open seat, there may be multiple candidates of the dominant party. Top 2 at least lets every vote participate in the election of the successor.
No, this is why all states should have easy ballot access for third parties. That would help the ballot issues. As for actually winning, as long as I have a choice of a candidate I like, I can accept them losing, but the choice is what matters. Top Two in a one-party district will get you two members of the same party a lot of the time, therefore no actual choice.
“Multiple candidates of the dominant party”
That really gives options to everyone who isn’t in that party. *rolls eyes* I will never understand supporters of Top Two. It just seems an absolutely ludicrous way to design how elections work.
JR —
ALL gerrymander systems (including top 2) —
1/2 or less votes x 1/2 rigged districts = 1/4 or less CONTROL = OLIGARCHY —
VERY LITTLE CHANGED IN 6,000 PLUS YEARS.
DO THE 2016 CA ASSEMBLY GERRYMANDER MATH –
VERY CLOSE TO THE 25 PERCENT CONTROL MATH — LOW 41 WIN DONKEYS OF 80 WIN
– DUE IN PART TO
— THE MANY NON-VOTERS IN DISTRICTS *NOT* HAVING 1 D AND 1 R
— THE RIGGED DISTRICTS HAVING MANY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS COUNTED IN THE 2010 CENSUS (ESP. IN L.A. COUNTY)
— IE WAY BELOW AVERAGE VOTES NEEDED TO ELECT.
—
SAME MATH ROT IN ALL STATES – ALL FED/STATE/LOCAL GERRYMANDER REGIMES.
@James Mahoney,
Georgia has 56 Senators. 19 Republicans and 15 Democrats are unopposed. 22 districts have a choice between a Republican and a Democrat.
It is naive in the extreme to think that if the Wee Party had easier ballot access that there would be dozens of Wee vs. Republican contests, or Democrat vs. Wee contests.
Under Top 2, all candidates have the same ballot access. This is likely to make it as easy for any candidate to qualify, as it is currently for Democrats and Republicans to qualify.
A Democrat or Republican can qualify with a fee of $400. They are unlikely to pass a bill that would make them collect 4,000 to 5,000 signatures, like independent senatorial candidates are currently required to do. There is at least the possibility of an independent or Wee Party candidate qualifying under an Open Primary system.
Under Top 2, virtually no alternative party candidates will be on the ballot in the general election. This is the opposite of voter choice.
Chris, top two is a three-party system, where two of three candidates can advance to the big dance guaranteed, with 33.33% (plus one vote).
In single winner districts that threshold is 50% (plus one vote).
The bottom line, the top two features a lower threshold (in both cases the threshold gets randomly lowered as additional candidates bring the split vote problem).
Any person who can unite people to reach 33.33% (plus one vote) can win under top two.
The bottom line is that under top two the threshold is lower (as it is for everyone across the board) so the goal would be to have the best message to unite voters under top two.
Going back to the 50% (plus one vote) is more difficult than 33.33% so I do not agree with your assessment.
NO primaries.
ONE election Day.
Ballot access via equal nominating petitions or filing fees.
PR — ALL districts will have multiple candidates
both the Donkeys and Elephants will shatter into parts
— more/less control freak statists.
Mr. Ogle, I would have to reconsider my position if you agreed with it.
The Top One system is by far the best. All voter confusion is eliminated!
Let’s see. What is the better solution to getting on the November ballot? Winning 33.33% of a 10,000 voter electorate, or paying $200? Gee. Tough call.
Thank you Honourable Powell, I have also been having great conversations with another OK, Honourable D Frank Robinson.
I know this is all new, but the only way to bring two differing genders is two-member districts and two breaking the three-way tie guarantees top female and top male (or visa versa) should 2/3rds vote that way but single winner districts cannot do that and we need to put teamwork ahead of single winners who may sometimes include our opposite gender.
We have an odd situation with 17 Libertarian POTUS candidates in 2020 so far only one female voice among them and we need more teawork in two-member districts and top two is helpful in two member districts like POTUS, by coincidence a national district.
What’s next —
drugs / surgery on some of the male candidates to get the Ogle quota of females ???
—
PR and AppV
Sorry – NO mention in USA Const. currently of 2 or more *commanders-in-chief* of USA military forces — with any sex quotas.
Wow Demo Rep ripping on Ogle!
@Chris Powell,
Elections are for the purpose of choosing an individual representative, not for choosing a favorite political organization.
A primary election is the first stage of a general election. A general election in which all or most members of a legislative body are elected, as opposed to a special election, in which only a few races are contested, usually to fill vacancies.
Under Top 2, individual voters can choose among all candidates. They may make that choice based on party affiliation, age, sex, eye color, personal relationships, experience, or whatever factors the voter deems important.
The second stage refines the choice made by the voters collectively. After all an election is a collective action.
Under Top 2 all candidates are placed on a single ballot, with the two individual candidates with the greatest support advancing to the second stage of the election.
Legislative elections are how about what the LAWS will be
— via Party Platforms — aka the party lines.
—
JR (among many) seems unable to detect —
1/2 or less votes x 1/2 rigged gerrymander districts
= 1/4 or less CONTROL = OLIGARCHY
>>> OLIGARCH LAWS — aka special interest gangster laws
— esp tax/borrow/spend laws.
IE who is a NET getter of Govt $$$ vs a NET payer of Govt $$$ —
nothing new in 6,000 plus years
ALL govts in USA are now spending about 38 percent of the GDP.
ALL govts in USA (FED/State/Local) now owe a mere about $ 34,000,000,000,000 — aka $ 34 TRILLION
about 2/3 is Fed – esp. due to military/wars and welfare – social NON-security.
IE the regimes have been borrowing/spending about 25 percent more than regime incomes since 1930
— ie a TOTAL economic CRISIS is coming — in ALL of Western Civilization.
About $ 12 TRILLION in private / public debt owed to foreigners — much of it used to finance Fed borrowing/spending – esp since 1982 – the SENILE Reagan regime.
—
PR and AppV — Time is running O-U-T.