Andrew Yang and his Forward Party have a website, which can be seen here. Yang and the Forward Party support top-four or top-five systems, in which parties don’t have nominees and all candidates appear on the same primary ballot. Then, the top four, or top five, appear on the November ballot, and the November ballot (but not the primary ballot) uses ranked choice voting.
When Yang announced his support for that type of election system, he referred to it as an “open primary.” But he and the website now refer to it instead as a “nonpartisan primary.” This is a welcome change, because it cuts down on confusion. “Open primary” has been defined in U.S. Supreme Court decisions (in footnotes) several times as a system in which each party has its own nominees and its own primary ballot, but on primary election day, any voter is free to choose any party’s primary ballot. Nineteen states have open primaries.
To call a top-five system an “open primary” muddles the discussion, because it is always confusing when the same term is used to describe two very different things.
I’m sorry but I have the same reservations with this as I do with JO Ogle’s contraption.
Why create a new contraption when Top Six/Level the Playing Field is simple and easy?
I suspect a deliberate attempt to divert attention from Top Six and muddy the waters.
Ballot access is far more important that primaries.
On election day the voters would have their own choice from the fairly and representatively selected/nominated by the six significant parties.
plus insignificant parties plus independents.
Don’t complicate it further than it already is.
This is also an attempt to distract from the Bowers case.
NOOOO primaries.
——
ONE election day
Equal nom pets
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
https://www.forwardparty.com/platform
various election items
https://www.forwardparty.com/platform
[election related items]
Term Limits
Support a constitutional amendment that would limit individuals to a maximum of 18 years in each chamber of Congress.
Ranked Choice Voting
Adopt ranked-choice voting systems for all elections that better captures the will of the majority of voters.
Nonpartisan Primaries
Adopt nonpartisan primary systems so that more people can participate in selecting the eventual general election candidates and thus have a voice in our country’s leadership.
[TOTAL CONFUSION – *NONPARTISAN* = NOOO PARTISAN CANDIDATES.]
Independent Redistricting Commissions
Voters should be choosing their representatives rather than representatives choosing their voters.
****
Democracy Dollars
Fight the influence of mega-donors in our elections and allow the voice of the people to be amplified by providing every American voter with $100 Democracy Dollars for each federal- and state-level election cycle.
Accessible and Secure Voting
Voting is time consuming and seemingly set up to disenfranchise large swaths of voters, which is why turnout even in presidential elections lags behind many other countries. We can restore confidence and engagement in the democratic process by making voting easier and more secure.
READ MORE TEXT —
Nonpartisan Primaries
William ‘Boss’ Tweed, who ran the Democratic Party machine in New York in the 19th century, famously declared, “I don’t care who does the electing, as long as I get to do the nominating.” Sadly, this quote still applies to how our primary process is run today.
Our current primary system has a number of drawbacks. Since partisan gerrymandering has resulted in the vast majority of districts being “safe,” and only a small percentage of party voters show up for primaries, it results in increasingly extreme candidates making it to the general election. It disproportionately empowers partisan gatekeepers, who largely decide the candidates that receive support and publicity. And, it does a poor job of reflecting the true preferences of the voters in a district.
We need to move to a system where primaries are nonpartisan – everyone who wants to run for a given office enters the same primary, and the top vote getters move on to the general election. Candidates could identify themselves with a party or not.
California and Washington have already implemented top-two primaries, in which the top two finishers advance to the general election regardless of party affiliation. In some districts, that means the top 2 candidates from the same party run against each other in the general. Members of the party will have more choice, and members of other parties will feel more connected, and less divided from, the eventual winner of the election. When the top 2 candidates are from different parties, a familiar general election dynamic plays out, albeit usually with more moderate candidates.
California made this change in 2012 and the results have been compelling. The number of races deemed competitive immediately doubled. Legislators seemed to notice and became more responsive. The approval rating of California’s legislature shot up from 10 percent in 2010 to 50% in 2016.
The relative losers of this shift would be incumbents and political party insiders who right now control the process very tightly. The winners would be the voters and the public.
(Note that this reform requires the implementation of Ranked-Choice Voting.)
Problems to be Solved
Closed primaries give political parties outsized interest in who gets to run in the general.
Closed primaries put the decision on who ends up on the ballot in the hands of the 10% of each party who tend towards the extremes.
The vast majority of districts being “safe” means that, by the time most voters make their voices heard, the winner has all but already been decided.
“Party primaries disenfranchise the majority of voters. In 80 percent of cases the general election is essentially a foreordained conclusion. Non-major-party candidates are regarded as a ‘waste’ of a vote and can never compete.” -Andrew Yang
We Should
Implement a Final Five Nonpartisan Primary system in as many jurisdictions as possible.
Allow all candidates to run together in the same primary, with all voters getting a voice in who will run in the general.
Tie this reform together with Ranked-Choice Voting so that candidates are required to build a broad coalition in order to succeed in the primary and general elections.
———-
SUPER MISLEADING TO CALL THE MESS A *NONPARTISAN* PRIMARY.
TOP 5 ALL PARTIES PRIMARY ???
Four postings in a row?
He’s just trying to distract from top 666 and tying up a ZOG loose end with Bowers.
The shared characteristic are that they are restricted-participation partisan primary. To use the term “open primary” to describe a primary because one may choose their party on election day is misleading.
Wow. Andy has become wildly antisemitic.
Andy comment might not be from original Andy.
The Forward Party may very well be a diversion additionally from the Bowers case.
Yang started with the democratic party.
So did Tiffany Briscoe.
My hypothesis is that the new government in Israel, displacing Netanyahu was from the realists/pragmatists preparing for a huge reaction to a possible favorable disposition in the Bowers case.
If Netanyahu was still Prime Minister, Israel would resist its downfall to the bitter end-The Samson Option.
Fortunately this coalition government would realize its predicament and relent to reality. They will organize a non violent transition from Israel to the Palestinian Authority.
Jews to Sinai.
The Beginning of The End of Israel.
Thank God.
Should Bowers resist Judy Clarke and plead not guilty with an affirmative defense I think the US Attorney being a realist/pragmatist, would move for dismissal.
Rather than face utter defeat in Court from Bowers’ Champion-ME.
I would present his affirmative defense to hid jury of his peers.
I would call Bowers himself to testify.
Who better to explain to the good jury his rationale of defense against the apartheid terrorist state of Israel with its international terrorist Mossad agents and zealous support of international jewry.
Defense of himself and others, including MYSELF, and his country which reactionary government zealously supports Israel self destructively.
The jury will find him NOT GUILTY. An acquittal for a hero.
#heroBowers.
The Beginning of The End of Israel.
Thank God.
Imagine being so deluded and corrupt as this prosecutor is in actually thinking there’s something wrong or illegal about randomly shooting jews.
Reason mag Dec 2021 has many stories of collapse of RED commie USSR regime in 1991 – mere 30 years ago.
Rot moved to 2021 USA regime – RED commie Biden, the *squad*, etc.
Yang – Forward Party more rot ???
Yang is an agent of the Chinese C0mmunist Party, just like Joe and Hunter Biden.
Re: Robert Bowers defense.
This was published today about an hour ago.
https://triblive.com/local/tree-of-life-synagogue-shooting-suspect-wont-pursue-insanity-or-intellectual-disability-defense/
“California made this change in 2012 and the results have been compelling. The number of races deemed competitive immediately doubled.”
Is this so? I am skeptical.
BAN readers and commenters.
Contact the judge, US attorney and the defense Judy Clarke et al and media.
Make sure Robert Bowers is aware of my offer to assist his defense pro bono.
That I offer him the affirmative defense of not guilty by reason of self defense and the defense of others and country.
I would present this defense to the jury. I would call upon him to testify.
He has nothing to hide; quite the contrary.
I would be his Champion; one that I needed and did not have in 1985.
I had a Federal Defender.
Ineffective in the least.
I will defeat the arrogant, ZOG lackey US attorney.
Robert Bowers, insist I assist you in your affirmative defense.
We will see if there can be justice in US Courts.
🤣😂🤣
Hey “Al” what’s so funny? Are you one of those jew lovers like the prosecutor who wants to infringe on the American right to randomly shoot and kill jews?
Well you’re jumping to a lot of conclusions from a few simple emoticons. Maybe he was commenting on Yang or something having to do with the so called Forward Party? Not everyone necessarily reads preceding comments when leaving theirs. Who knows? Try getting your head out of your ass, “Bruce.”