[duffee]

I believe “Jungle” primaries work to the advantage of the incumbents and or party elite. The message always is “come on get on board or we won’t even be in or possibly not have a runoff”. We’re much better off with a closed primary and let Republicans and Conservatives hold their primary and discuss their differences and let democrats have theirs.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I believe “Jungle” primaries work to the advantage of the incumbents and or party elite. The message always is “come on get on board or we won’t even be in or possibly not have a runoff”. We’re much better off with a closed primary and let Republicans and Conservatives hold their primary and discuss their differences and let democrats have theirs.

If you notice, I didn’t say that jungle primaries were better than closed primaries; I don’t have experience of them and I wouldn’t know. But it just has to be better than an open primary with no contest on the Democrat side.

I don’t think I would be induced to “get on board” a second-placing candidate in preference to voting for my preferred “third” candidate. After all, any vote not for the leading Democrat is as much a vote against installing that Democrat without a runoff as a vote for the favored-for-second) candidate wold be. Time enough for settling, after the “jungle primary” is over.

[Redbob]

"I believe “Jungle” primaries work to the advantage of the incumbents..."

Yes, I believe it was Mary Landrieu said that, wasn't it?