On May 26, the Nevada Republican Party filed a lawsuit in state court, asking that the Secretary of state be prevented from holding a 2024 presidential primary for the Republican Party. Nevada Republican Party v State of Nevada, 1st jud. dist., Carson City, 23-0000051-1B. The Nevada Republican Party would rather use a caucus. The presidential primary for qualified major parties was passed by the Nevada legislature in 2021.
In Arizona in 1996, a state court ruled that if the Democratic Party and the Libertarian Party didn’t want the state to hold presidential primaries for them, they had a Freedom of Association right to tell the state not to hold such presidential primaries. That case was Arizona State Democratic Committee v Hull, Maricopa County Superior Court cv96-909. That is the only precedent from any state on this issue.
Here is the Nevada Republican Complaint. Thanks to Derek Muller for the link.
It’s idiotic to permit party label printing if the central political bureau of the party or party congress does not get to decide exactly who does or does not get to use the party label. Consider allowing corporate labels in stores if the corporations do not get to stop competition from false flag use of their name, label, logo etc.
Conversely you could have no party labels at all on ballot, but what that actually does is the opposite of what you might think. That is, the biggest, best financed, most well connected factions and individuals end up monopolizing political power even more than now, because they have the means to promote their candidate and brand identification through other means, where as the fringe parties, ideologies, and individuals rely much more on the ballot label to build or maintain any kind of traction at all.
Both problems can be avoided by not having ballots, but rather standing counts of physical individuals who have and who stand together with other physical adult male humans who they have known well their whole entire lives and whose families have known each other for generations. Otherwise you have to rely on lying politicians, lying political operatives, lying professional opinion manipulators, dumb herd “hot or not” instincts etc to elect liars/lawyers to continuously manipulate libraries of arcane jargon which it is physically impossible for a normal human to understand and memorize, but which they can be locked up in a human zoo for violating because ignorance of the law is no excuse, if they happen to be unlucky enough to be picked out from the herd for violating some passage from some book they never read and not manipulating their way through the Kafkaesque bureaucrats and lawyers sufficiently well. These human zoos and the process of putting people in them all being at great tax expense.
But why even bother pointing out that the entire process is objectively insane? There is not a critical mass of brain cells and actively firing neurons for political wonks with a particular interest in outside the box thinking to seriously consider that this whole process is objectively insane and what might be better and why or why not. Getting the random mass of millions of people with better things than politics to think about every day to consider radical alternatives is laughable. The lack of human scale in government and politics causes an objectively insane byzantine mess of a Gordian knot to get worse and worse over time, since untangling it is beyond individual capacity, and efforts to cooperatively untangle by various groups work at cross purposes and just make it worse and worse.
The conclusion therefore is that there can be no political solution to the political problem. The answer can’t be in political discussion and participation. Guns and Bibles are a much better answer, and the eventual reimposition of a neofeudal and theocratic social order with modern technology. Looking for political wonk solutions to the existing mess is a complete fool’s errand completely divorced from actual social and political reality. You may as well be explaining political theory to various herds of herd animals in different stages of the factory farming process. You would have an approximately equal amount of real world impact by passing out guns or political manifestos or both to a literal herd of sheep or cows on an actual march to a real life slaughterhouse.
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=136541
NONSTOP BRAIN DEAD COURTS ABOUT —
1. VOTERS IN PARTY FACTIONS IN GOVT PRIMARIES.
2. BALLOT ACCESS FOR PARTISAN PREZ CANDIDATES [IE 12TH AMDT STATE ELECTORS] VIA PARTIES.
—
IE STATE GERRYMANDER OLIGARCHS TRYING TO DICTATE HOW NATL PARTY CONVENTIONS ARE HELD —
EXTRA-TERRITORIAL STUFF [OUT OF STATE].
If a party doesn’t want a primary, that’s their right.
THE GUY WHO THINKS THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRUMP AND HITLER IS THAT HITLER WAS IN JAIL REALLY SHOULDN’T BE CALLING ANYONE ELSE BRAIN DEAD. ESPECIALLY IF HE’S UNWILLING, UNABLE OR BOTH TO ANSWER OPPOSING ARGUMENTS. NO WONDER ALL HIS CASES GOT LAUGHED OUT OF COURT DECADES AGO AND HE DOES NOT EVEN TRY ANYMORE. NOW HIS SOLE REMAINING PURPOSE IN LIFE IS TO BE AN ANNOYING CLUELESS TROLL MORON ON THE INTERNET. HE PROBABLY HASN’T LEFT HIS BASEMENT IN X YEARS. SOLVE FOR X.
@WZ,
If a group of like minded voters want to support a particular candidate they can assist in placing him on the ballot by petition.
You still have not answered the criticism of why that would be worse than partisan access.
@Fred,
Who does “you” refer to.
You, Jim Riley.
@Fred,
If by “that” you mean placing all candidates on the ballot by petition (or even better personal appearance), “that” is better than the usual system of government sanctioning of “qualified” political parties.
That refers to the argument that Dooley made as to why you are wrong, and voting by party is actually better. Max gave you the link probably like 10 or more times in different threads and you never addressed the meat of the argument. I’d go fetch the link for you yet again if I didn’t think it was a waste of time. Let me know if you ever want to give it anything more than a fly by answer that skirts the actual point.