[Lady Heron]

I am not sorry you voted that way. It is a choice you felt you should make as a Republican. Same with the McClintok voters, they felt as Republicans that is the choice they should make. I might not agree with your choice but I am not going to throw a temper tantrum and call you names. I find what has been going on in this election, a reason to thank our founding fathers for the system they set up. It proves the wisdom of holding primaries.

[goldstategop]

The good news is Arnold will have to run right if he hopes to be reelected 3 years from now. If he doesn't he'll be a one term wonder.

[Ichneumon]

I find what has been going on in this election, a reason to thank our founding fathers for the system they set up. It proves the wisdom of holding primaries.

Um, actually, not.

Our founding fathers actually set up a "free for all" election system in the Constitution -- primaries of any sort were never mentioned.

It's the political *parties* (parties aren't mentioned in the Constitution either) who saw the "wisdom" of having a private "election" among themselves to decide who they were going to put forth as their single candidate for a given office, so as not to split votes.

There's nothing in the Constitution or anywhere else that would have stopped the California GOP from quickly setting up a pre-recall primary election for registered Republicans to vote on whether McClintock or Scharzeneggar would be the sole Republican candidate for the recall vote. And there's nothing in the Constitution or anywhere else that would stop the GOP from skipping primaries and putting up 2 or 20 candidates on any national election either.

Primaries are an intra-party tradition, not a Constitutionally instituted process.