Re: [ZION] Voting and Parties

2002-10-23 Thread John W. Redelfs
At 08:36 PM, Wednesday, 10/23/02, Gary Smith wrote:

One more thing. We need to put term limits on all Congress. One term for
Senate, two for House. Then we wouldn't have people fighting to keep
themselves forever in office, and it would reduce the amount of voter
bribes. New Senators and Congressmen have a vision to fix America. Old
ones are mostly interested in keeping their position.


I disagree on the matter of term limits because it violates the spirit of 
the Constitution.  There needs to be a balance of power among the three 
branches of government.  Over the past two centuries the national 
legislature has irresponsibly been giving up more and more of its power 
over the executive branch.  Term limits would just accelerate that 
shift.  Without checks and balances we will have dictatorship.  And checks 
and balances only work if the three branches of the federal government are 
more or less evenly balanced.

I believe the idea of term limits was discussed by those in the original 
Constitutional Drafting Convention and it was rejected.  I haven't done the 
study to learn what their reasons were.

In any case, I object to term limits on Constitutional reasons.  I know 
that puts me at odds with my fellow conservatives, but then William F. 
Buckley campaigned for giving away the Panama Canal Zone.  Not every person 
with the public persona of a conservative actually is one.

Finally Brigham Young didn't like the idea of term limits.  He once said 
that if a good man is in the office, he should be kept there indefinitely 
to keep the scoundrels out of that seat.  Term limits can 
backfire.  Actually they usually do.


John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
"I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd like to see more
and more planets fall under the ruthless domination of
our solar system." --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Voting and Parties

2002-10-23 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 07:36 PM 10/23/2002, you wrote:

IMO, I agree with President George Washington in his Farewell Address,
that we should shun political parties. All they have done is divide the
nation along a single line without as much as a care for actual platform.
Too many people vote for a party, simply because their parents did. Very
few vote for the character of the individual or that person's individual
platform.

Just because a party has a platform does not mean the individual holds to
it. Whatever happened to George Bush's promise to help the schools?
Instead, he turned the process over to Ted Kennedy and the Democrats'
pro-teacher's-union platform to decide what to do. We didn't get what was
promised, and most people have forgotten, because they are tied to the
party, rather than the policies.

Instead of passing laws to protect us from terrorism and to fund the war
on it, the two parties are fighting over platform issues: should the new
workers be unionized? Should we throw in money for after school programs,
so we can help the incumbents get reelected? Instead of hitting the real
issues, we have Daschle attacking inane items; and we have the
Republicans ignoring the economy in order to win the election through the
war on terrorism.

Finally, without parties, we would be able to have more people run for
office and have a chance of winning. We wouldn't need campaign reform,
because money would be tied to the individual and not to a political
party and its abuses. And we wouldn't have the crimes of an elected
leader protected by a political party, whether it is Nixon or Clinton, if
one is guilty of crimes, the entire Congress should honestly investigate
it and do their job; not sweep sins under the carpet in order to protect
the party.

One more thing. We need to put term limits on all Congress. One term for
Senate, two for House. Then we wouldn't have people fighting to keep
themselves forever in office, and it would reduce the amount of voter
bribes. New Senators and Congressmen have a vision to fix America. Old
ones are mostly interested in keeping their position.

K'aya K'ama,
Gerald/gary  Smith


I'd like to see the electoral college used the way the framers 
intended--each state would decide how their particular electoral college 
representatives would be elected, and then these representatives would vote 
for president. This way the chances are a better candidate would be elected 
rather than mediocre or poor candidates who might look better or have that 
certain popular charisma than more qualified but less popularly appealing 
candidates.

We don't need term limits. We already have term limits if the people so 
choose--their vote.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today." 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Voting and parties

2002-10-23 Thread Jon Spencer
In a primary election where people are voting to select a candidate to run
in the general election, only members of a particular party should be able
to select their party's candidate.  At least, that is my opinion.
Unfortunately, people with an agenda have changed this in many states.  Of
course, this has backfired on them in subsequent elections, but there is
this law of unintended consequences that we do have to deal with.

Jon

> Mark Gregson wrote:
>
> You mean to say that you cannot vote in the US unless you register
> your "preference"?  Is that true?  And if it is, what's the point
> of it?  Since your vote is secret, why register a preference?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-23 Thread Cousin Bill
At some point in the past, Stephen wrote:

> To make sure the Democrats in an area don't band together and elect a
> Republican candidate who can't possibly win the general election, and
> vice versa.
-
This happens, I'm sure.  I mentioned before that this is the way things are
done in Georgia.  Whenever someone loses a primary, they inevitably use this
as an excuse for losing.  It doesn't make much sense, though, when both
parties are holding primaries.  I have mainly voted in Republican primaries.
Off hand, I don't recall ever voting in a Democratic primary, but I wouldn't
deny it.  Before I became of voting age, I understand that practically
everything in Georgia was determined at the Democratic primary because the
Republican party didn't have much of a chance at anything.  That is no
longer the case, though Democrats still maintain a firm grip on a lot of
offices.

BTW, I have sent in my absentee ballot.  I have no idea whether it will
actually be counted or not.  There were many offices in which I voted for
neither the Democrat or Republican candidate.  I am a firm believer in
voting for who you think is best, not who you think will win.  That includes
the liberal use of write-in voting.  (I have voted for Grampa Bill many
times in the past, and for two offices this time around.  Gramma Letty, too,
for that matter.)

Cousin Bill

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: RE: [ZION] Voting and parties

2002-10-23 Thread Paul Osborne
>For the last couple of years I've been toying with the idea of becoming
a 
>Democrat, although as a conservative and Constitutionalist I don't
imagine 
>I would be a very good Democrat.  


I think I understand a little bit what you are saying and we talked about
it when I visited you. I'm torn between the parties. I like a lot of
things the Democrats push and I like a lot of things that the Republicans
push and the reverse is also true. But, as Gary said, the Democrats are
in favor of things that I simply cannot tolerate. And the Republicans in
the end make me barf up. The other parties don't have a chance and I
don't want to vote for a looser.

I'm stuck. What do I do?

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Marc A. Schindler


Stephen Beecroft wrote:

> -Stephen-
> > Interesting. So, then, what did you intend to say when you wrote:
> >
> >  So to say that my late father was a Democrat means that he
> >  was registered as a Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty
> >  meaningless, because the vote is secret, and you can vote
> >  for whomever you like.
> >
>
> -Marc-
> >  You know, this isn't rocket science.
>
> No, it's not. It's called "reading".
>
> > All you have to do is read, not cut and paste selectively
> > in what appears to be a deliberately polemical way.
>
> In fact, I cut and pasted to preserve the meaning as much as possible
> without simply requoting your entire email.
>
> > I had already made my point about state conventions, then went
> > on to write what you've quoted.
>
> Wrong. The part I quoted was at the beginning of your email. You then
> went on to expound even more after that.
>

Stephen, please knock it off. You know darn well thiw wasn't the beginning of my
email -- you'd already quoted the whole paragraph before. Before I wrote what you
quoted, I wrote, "Being a 'member' of a party in our Westminster system means
something different than it does in the U.S. In  the U.S. every voter registers
for a party (or as an independent -- as I  recall the rules vary considerably
from state to state, as to how the states elect their delegates to the party
national conventions). "  This was then followed by what you selectively quoted,
"So to say that my late father was a Democrat means that he was registered as a
Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty meaningless, because the vote is secret,
and you can vote for whomever you like." I changed my focus from state
conventions (primaries) to elections. If you don't want to accept my explanation
as to what I was thinking when I wrote this, then there's no point continuing
this as far as I'm concerned. You see what you want to see.

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“We do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds; the
worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly
debated…To think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was
a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly
character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was
totally unfitted for action.” – Pericles about his fellow-Athenians, as quoted by
Thucydides in “The Peloponessian Wars”

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




RE: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Stephen Beecroft
-Stephen-
> Interesting. So, then, what did you intend to say when you wrote:
>
>  So to say that my late father was a Democrat means that he
>  was registered as a Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty
>  meaningless, because the vote is secret, and you can vote
>  for whomever you like.
>

-Marc-
>  You know, this isn't rocket science.

No, it's not. It's called "reading".

> All you have to do is read, not cut and paste selectively
> in what appears to be a deliberately polemical way.

In fact, I cut and pasted to preserve the meaning as much as possible 
without simply requoting your entire email.

> I had already made my point about state conventions, then went
> on to write what you've quoted.

Wrong. The part I quoted was at the beginning of your email. You then 
went on to expound even more after that.

> Again you've quoted me out of context.

Marc, go back and read your email. I have quoted you perfectly in 
context. Sheesh. Just admit you were wrong, and you really don't know 
everything, despite how you might wish to appear.

> This particular reference is to voting following the primaries.

No, Marc, it is not. Would you like me to quote your email at length and 
demonstrate that you were *not* talking about "voting following the 
primaries"? I can. Easier would be for you to go back and read what you 
wrote.

> Was it that hard to figure out, or are you your own worst
> enemy when it comes to understanding what others write?

Is it that hard to be honest, Marc, or are you your own worst enemy in 
remembering what you yourself wrote?

> If you were referring to primaries, then why did you say that
> affilliation was "meaningless, because...you can vote for
> whomever you like"? This is clearly false, even in primaries.

You lose either way. Either you were talking about primaries, as you 
claimed second, in which case you are just plain wrong; or else, as you 
originally (and now again) say, you were talking about the general 
election, in which case your claim that everyone had to be registered 
with a party is clearly false in every single state.

-Stephen-
> And you never did respond to the question of why your
> statement, "[i]n the U.S. every voter registers for a
> party (or as an independent)", was not false on its face,
> given that not all states require registration in a party to
> participate in primaries, much less the general election.

-Marc-
> Because I thought it was a dumb question, if you really
> insist on an answer.

And yet, you still don't answer the "dumb" question. Probably because 
the "dumb" question shows that you are wrong. Your statement was false, 
any way you slice it. There is no sense in which your claim "In the U.S 
every voter registers for a party (or as an independent)" is true.

Curses upon those dumb questions!

> If you want me to be tactful, give me room to be tactful.

Marc, I no more expect you to be tactful than I expect a skunk to smell 
nice. Your tact, such as it is, almost always ends whenever you are 
shown to be wrong. I must admit, however, you put on a most impressive 
display of gymnastic ability in seeking to avoid direct responses to 
challenges to your assertions and claims.

Stephen

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Marc A. Schindler


Stephen Beecroft wrote:

> -Marc-
> > Exactly. I was referring to state party conventions, what you
> > call in US English, primaries.
>
> Interesting. So, then, what did you intend to say when you wrote:
>
>  So to say that my late father was a Democrat means that he
>  was registered as a Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty
>  meaningless, because the vote is secret, and you can vote
>  for whomever you like.
>

 You know, this isn't rocket science. All you have to do is read, not cut
and paste selectively in what appears to be a deliberately polemical way. I had
already made my point about state conventions, then went on to write what you've
quoted. Again you've quoted me out of context.  This particular reference is to
voting following the primaries. Was it that hard to figure out, or are you your
own worst enemy when it comes to understanding what others write?

>
> If you were referring to primaries, then why did you say that
> affilliation was "meaningless, because...you can vote for whomever you
> like"? This is clearly false, even in primaries. And you never did
> respond to the question of why your statement, "[i]n the U.S. every
> voter registers for a party (or as an independent)", was not false on
> its face, given that not all states require registration in a party to
> participate in primaries, much less the general election.
>

Because I thought it was a dumb question, if you really insist on an answer. If
you want me to be tactful, give me room to be tactful.

>
> Clarifyingly,
>
> Stephen
>

Be careful what you ask for. You might get it. Clarification, in this case.

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“We do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds; the
worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly
debated…To think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was
a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly
character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was
totally unfitted for action.” – Pericles about his fellow-Athenians, as quoted by
Thucydides in “The Peloponessian Wars”

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




RE: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Stephen Beecroft
-Marc-
> Exactly. I was referring to state party conventions, what you
> call in US English, primaries.

Interesting. So, then, what did you intend to say when you wrote:

 So to say that my late father was a Democrat means that he
 was registered as a Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty
 meaningless, because the vote is secret, and you can vote
 for whomever you like.

If you were referring to primaries, then why did you say that 
affilliation was "meaningless, because...you can vote for whomever you 
like"? This is clearly false, even in primaries. And you never did 
respond to the question of why your statement, "[i]n the U.S. every 
voter registers for a party (or as an independent)", was not false on 
its face, given that not all states require registration in a party to 
participate in primaries, much less the general election.

Clarifyingly,

Stephen

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Exactly. I was referring to state party conventions, what you call in US English,
primaries.

Stephen Beecroft wrote:

> -Marc-
> > In the U.S. every voter registers for a party (or as an
> > independent -- as I recall the rules vary considerably from
>
> -Stephen-
> > This is not correct.
>
> -Marc-
> > Please don't interrupt.
>
> Oops. My bad. I had thought this was John Redelfs' discussion list, not
> Marc Schindler's lecture hall. Silly me.
>
> > If you read the whole post, I made clear that this was to
> > vote in party conventions -- what you call primaries.
>
> Wrong. Your first paragraph was: "Being a 'member' of a party in our
> Westminster system means something different than it does in the U.S. In
> the U.S. every voter registers for a party (or as an independent -- as I
> recall the rules vary considerably from state to state, as to how the
> states elect their delegates to the party national conventions). So to
> say that my late father was a Democrat means that he was registered as a
> Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty meaningless, because the vote is
> secret, and you can vote for whomever you like."
>
> This paragraph clearly was referring to the general election, since you
> said affiliation was "meaningless" and that "you can vote for whomever
> you like", something not possible in primaries. Only in your next
> paragraph did you go on to discuss primaries.
>
> Even if you had "made clear that this was to vote in...primaries",
> you're still wrong. In no sense is it true that "[i]n the U.S. every
> voter registers for a party (or as an independent)". A great many voters
> do not register under any affiliation whatsoever, and some states allow
> participation in primaries without a declared affiliation.
>
>  Maybe you should read your own posts more carefully.
> Alternatively, you could admit when you're wrong...oh, never mind. No
> use dwelling in a land of fantasy. 
>
> Tweakin' Stephen
>
> /
> ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
> ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
> /
>

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“We do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds; the
worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly
debated…To think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was
a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly
character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was
totally unfitted for action.” – Pericles about his fellow-Athenians, as quoted by
Thucydides in “The Peloponessian Wars”

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





RE: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Stephen Beecroft
-Marc-
> In the U.S. every voter registers for a party (or as an
> independent -- as I recall the rules vary considerably from

-Stephen-
> This is not correct.

-Marc-
> Please don't interrupt.

Oops. My bad. I had thought this was John Redelfs' discussion list, not 
Marc Schindler's lecture hall. Silly me.

> If you read the whole post, I made clear that this was to
> vote in party conventions -- what you call primaries.

Wrong. Your first paragraph was: "Being a 'member' of a party in our 
Westminster system means something different than it does in the U.S. In 
the U.S. every voter registers for a party (or as an independent -- as I 
recall the rules vary considerably from state to state, as to how the 
states elect their delegates to the party national conventions). So to 
say that my late father was a Democrat means that he was registered as a 
Democrat. As it happens, this is pretty meaningless, because the vote is 
secret, and you can vote for whomever you like."

This paragraph clearly was referring to the general election, since you 
said affiliation was "meaningless" and that "you can vote for whomever 
you like", something not possible in primaries. Only in your next 
paragraph did you go on to discuss primaries.

Even if you had "made clear that this was to vote in...primaries", 
you're still wrong. In no sense is it true that "[i]n the U.S. every 
voter registers for a party (or as an independent)". A great many voters 
do not register under any affiliation whatsoever, and some states allow 
participation in primaries without a declared affiliation.

 Maybe you should read your own posts more carefully. 
Alternatively, you could admit when you're wrong...oh, never mind. No 
use dwelling in a land of fantasy. 

Tweakin' Stephen

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Marc A. Schindler


Stephen Beecroft wrote:

> -Marc-
> > In the U.S. every voter registers for a party (or as an
> > independent -- as I recall the rules vary considerably from
>
> This is not correct.

Please don't interrupt. If you read the whole post, I made clear that this was to
vote in party conventions -- what you call primaries.


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“We do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds; the
worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly
debated…To think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was
a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly
character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was
totally unfitted for action.” – Pericles about his fellow-Athenians, as quoted by
Thucydides in “The Peloponessian Wars”

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




RE: [ZION] Voting and parties (was Re: Cuba and Castro)

2002-10-22 Thread Stephen Beecroft
-Marc-
> In the U.S. every voter registers for a party (or as an
> independent -- as I recall the rules vary considerably from

This is not correct.

-Mark-
> What?  You mean to say that you cannot vote in the US unless
> you register your "preference"?  Is that true?

No, it is not true. Many states do require you to register in order to 
vote in the primaries, though.

> And if it is, what's the point of it?

To make sure the Democrats in an area don't band together and elect a 
Republican candidate who can't possibly win the general election, and 
vice versa.

> Since your vote is secret, why register a preference?

In a primary, you may only vote within your registered party if you live 
in a state with such rules. Some states don't have any such rules, which 
I consider to be a mistake (the lack of such rules, I mean).

> As to voting or supporting a party: I'm not sure that I follow
> what Elder Jensen was saying.  What's the point of voting for a
> party if you don't accept their policies?

Obviously, I can't speak for Elder Jensen, but I suspect the general 
authorities are concerned about the lack of opposition to the 
Republicans in Utah. This lack of political balance allows the 
Republicans to bend the rules and control state politics without an 
effective counterbalance. Personally, I'm not sure that's so much worse 
than the perpetual gridlock you so often get with more "balanced" state 
legislatures. In any case, it is vastly preferable to having a bunch of 
Democrats in charge.

Stephen

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




RE: [ZION] Voting and parties

2002-10-22 Thread Larry Jackson
Mark Gregson:

You mean to say that you cannot vote in the US unless you register 
your "preference"?  Is that true?  And if it is, what's the point 
of it?  Since your vote is secret, why register a preference?

___

I do not recall living in a state where you had to declare a party 
preference in order to register to vote.

In the state where I now live, if you vote in a primary election, 
you vote only in the primary election of one particular party.  You 
automatically become a member of that party and you cannot vote 
or participate in the other party's election.

After the primary election (and any runoffs, as needed), anyone 
registered may vote in the general election in November (including 
those who did not vote in the primary election).

This primary election law has some unusual consequences.  A judge 
who had served well for 20 years as a Democrat was unopposed.  He 
decided to vote for his friend, a Republican in their primary.  
Because he did this, he was ruled ineligible to be on the Democratic 
ballot, was removed, and another Democrat was appointed to take his 
place.

In the meantime, the Republicans had not put up a Republican 
challenger, but now a different Democrat was going to walk into 
office unopposed.  Because the law does not allow a Republican 
on the ballot this election, since a Republican primary election 
was not held, there will be an independent write-in candidate 
for whom folks may vote in November.  It will be interesting.

The state supreme court has upheld all of this as lawful and 
constitutional under state law.

Larry Jackson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^