A group of Colorado Republican activists are working to persuade the state party to end primaries for the party for 2022, and instead nominate by caucus and convention. In order for the proposal to be adopted by the party, three-fourths of the members of the state governing body must agree.
Major parties in Colorado have the right to make this change, as a result of the initiative that passed a few years ago that said if a party uses primaries, it must let independent voters participate in those primaries.
NOOO PARTY HACK EXTREMIST CAUCUSES, PRIMARIES AND CONVENTIONS.
EQUAL NOM PETS FOR BALLOT ACCESS.
ONE [GENERAL] ELECTION DAY – PER YEAR.
I think conventions are the best way to go. I am not being sarcastic when I say that smoke filled rooms of party activists have always chosen the best candidates.
CAUCUS/CONVENTION HACKS —
RESULT THE TOTAL ROT IN THE USA —-
BARBARIAN OLDE URBAN CITIES, LUNATIC ANNUAL DEFICITS AND WORSE ACCUMULATED DEBTS, INFLATION / DESTRUCTION OF SO-CALLED MONEY, URBAN SPRAWL, POLLUTION, WORSE/WORSE SKOOOLS, ETC.
JUST SWELL – THANKS HACKS IN CONVENTIONS – ESP COMMIE DONKEY/FASCIST ELEPHANT CONVENTION HACKS.
Not surprised commie Stock doesn’t want people to choose their candidates. North Korea agrees with Stock.
Parties should choose their candidates, however they want. Primary, convention, caucus, smoke filled room, lottery drawing – I don’t care. Just as long as they pay for and run it themselves. Do not bill the taxpayers, and try to resolve any disputes themselves without running to government courts. Better yet would be an open ballot. Anyone can print up and distribute whatever ticket they want, or print their own at home. A party is just a suggested list of candidates. None of the gov’s biz.
PUBLIC electors / offices / nominations / elections.
PRIVATE 1 Amdt endorsements.
In other news: Georgia Green Party officially deaccredited: https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2021/07/georgia-green-party-deaccredited/
Its a big controversy nowadays whether its better to have political parties pick their candidates without a primary election or the voters choose through primaries/caucuses. Both arguments have advantages and disadvantages. I would like to read Mr. Wingers opinion on the issue.
I think the rest of the democratic world does a better job. The US is the only nation in the world with mandatory government-administered primaries for parties to choose their nominees. We didn’t have such mandatory government-administered primaries in the period before the 1900’s decade, and I think before the 1900’s the parties did a better job of choosing nominees than they do nowadays. Many talented individuals would run for office in the general election if they didn’t also need to worry about winning a primary, and campaign finance expenses would be much less without primaries. Also voters wouldn’t need to go to the polls so often.
No need for govt financed or run primaries or caucuses or conventions. Simple.
Mr. Winger and U W U have said it for me.
Maybe there’s hope yet, one day.
Thank you Mr. Winger. I agree.
Robert Stock,
Depends on the type of smoke.
Georgia Weedman: Historically that meant tobacco. Today it can be anything the party leaders want it to be.
Technology is creating new means for parties to make nominations without either primaries or conventions: electronic, mail-in, or block-chain voting, and virtual caucuses and conventions; and all at a much lesser cost than in-person primaries. The laws ought to be changed to give parties all of these options.
Agreed!
Ice ice baby