Hi Fred, > It seems to me the point you're making (and, for goodness sake, > correct me if I've bollixed it) is that, if we are to eliminate > partisan control of government, we must first understand the source > of party power.
That would be wise, at least. For my part, I point to the absolute dependence of party power on the combination of a primary electoral system and an exclusive electorate. > Parties are able to exercise control because only party members are > allowed to vote on the selection of candidates for public office. > To correct this state of affairs, we must use our imaginations to go > beyond what we can see and imagine that it's possible to lift that > restriction. > If we can imagine that, if voting by non-partisans were allowed, > the party would lose control. The implication is that, to eliminate > the power of parties, we must find a way to remove that exclusivity. The last sentence says it best. There is no way to eliminate primary elections in a society where freedoms of speech and association are respected. They are too well armoured. That leaves exclusivity as the target for our sling stone. -- Michael Allan Toronto, +1 416-699-9528 http://zelea.com/ Fred Gohlke said: > Good Morning, Michael > > I think I understand your point. Before I comment on it, I'd like to > mention that the example of an assertive, strong-willed non-partisan was > probably of minor importance. The point was that, in any single primary > election, if such an individual participated in conjunction with a > party, it could only be with one party in any one election, and > association with the group would affect both the person and the group. > However, that may be, it is a digression from the line of thought you > were suggesting. > > It seems to me the point you're making (and, for goodness sake, correct > me if I've bollixed it) is that, if we are to eliminate partisan control > of government, we must first understand the source of party power. > > Parties are able to exercise control because only party members are > allowed to vote on the selection of candidates for public office. To > correct this state of affairs, we must use our imaginations to go beyond > what we can see and imagine that it's possible to lift that restriction. > If we can imagine that, if voting by non-partisans were allowed, the > party would lose control. The implication is that, to eliminate the > power of parties, we must find a way to remove that exclusivity. > > I would like to comment on this, but want to be sure my understanding is > correct before I do so. Please let me know. > > Fred ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info