Posted on 10/07/2018 6:53:04 AM PDT by Brookhaven
If the California primary election seems a little crowded on June 5, it’s not by accident.
California is one of three states that employ an election process known as the “jungle primary” that leaves the top two vote getters, regardless of political party, facing off in runoff elections in November. That means in theory a Democrat could compete against another Democrat, or a Republican could compete against another Republican instead of having the top vote getter in each party’s primary advancing.
(Excerpt) Read more at sandiegouniontribune.com ...
Republicans may not have the majority of votes, but I'm guessing they do have enough votes to swing the election one way or another--if they vote as a block. And, that block vote should be against the Democrat incumbent.
If the jungle primary becomes viewed as a system where it's harder for a Democrat incumbent to be reelected, they'll end it. If they don't, we can enjoy watching Democrat incumbents going down in defeat (if we can't win, we can at least enjoy the chaos).
“jungle primary”...………
How appropriate, coming from the land of nuts, fruits and flakes.
enough votes to swing the election one
way or another—if they vote as a block.
**********
That would work both ways wouldn’t it?
Might help if the R’s didn’t run 6 candidates for a position.
Except, there are never general elections featuring two Republicans.
The system was set up to freeze Republicans out of the general election ballots.
True, but you’re never going to have that much discipline among candidates.
And even if you did, the Democrats would run faux Republicans in the primary to dilute the GOP vote to help ensure two Democrats on the general ballot.
Yes, but we still get a choice between Lenin and Stalin in November.....
We can take out Finestein. Waiting for the marching orders.
Oe worse.., it is a Feinstein or a La Raza candidate for me to choose from..... imagine that nightmare facing you in the ballot box.
This year there really is no choice between the lesser of two evils. And they do not count write-in votes.
I can’t wait for the Kavanaugh Supreme Court to rule this an unconstitutional ban on free speech and free assembly.
California isn’t the only one with this type system. It’s their
method of choosing. If enough people don’t like it then they
can change it via the ballot box.
I was going to vote for Feinstein since she seemed the saner and less dangerous of the two. After Kavanaugh i’m not sure.
If this is such a good idea, why don’t they use it for Presidential elections? That idea of a Republican running against a Democrat, with various smaller lunatic fringe parties having other candidates on a regular ballot, seems so 20th century.
I don’t think it’s a good idea. That’s why I made a proposal to end it.
California has been converted to a jungle of sick communists and will never be worth calling a State of this great Union. Communists garbage with millions of illegals who most vote.
Stand down, soldier. De Leon would be worse and I’d bet a hundred bucks he’d come out as democratic socialist after being elected
Louisiana has used the “jungle primary” since 1975. I think WA and AK have it too now.
“I realized there is a way we can create chaos in California’s jungle primary system: always vote against the incumbent in a two Democrat race.”
__________________________________________
That’s what I’ve been saying. LOL Every single Repulican in California needs to be sure to head to the Ballot Box and in this year’s election be sure to vote against Sen Feinstein. Her replacement will have zip/nada power and the Republicans have 6 years to search out a good solid Republican to replace him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.