Open primaries on the ballot
-
chester field
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:09 am
- Location: Pinellas
-
chester field
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:09 am
- Location: Pinellas
In Pinellas, the registered voters are roughly 1/3 Democrat, 1/3 Republican, and 1/3 Independent/NPA. I wonder how many are declared party just because of closed primaries. Hopefully this will pass.
Common Sense... so rare it's like a super power
I received exactly one political ad in the mail regarding this amendment. It had a picture of a diverse crowd of people marching down a street. Diverse, as in, the official politically correct version of "diverse". Not a single person who looked like me in the picture. The ad copy read something like "if this passes, it will erase all our hard work and dilute our vote and be bad for us and yadda yadda yadda....".
Although this is something that I have been wanting to see in Florida for years and I was already planning to vote "yes", that ad clinched it for me.
Google who is against it - to me, the League of Women Voters's opposing it is a good reason to consider supporting it.
Although this is something that I have been wanting to see in Florida for years and I was already planning to vote "yes", that ad clinched it for me.
Google who is against it - to me, the League of Women Voters's opposing it is a good reason to consider supporting it.
Last edited by flcracker on Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
....and some rin up hill and down dale, knapping the chucky stanes to pieces wi' hammers, like sae mony road-makers run daft - they say it is to see how the warld was made!
Saint Ronan's Well - Sir Walter Scott, Bart. (1824)
Saint Ronan's Well - Sir Walter Scott, Bart. (1824)
Do we really want to open a situation where the top two candidates of a primary - and the only candidates between whom you can vote in a general election - are of the same party? That could make your choice in the general "do you want your sh*t sandwich with or without mustard?"
I'm in favor of allowing NPA voters to vote in primaries, but not the way it's been proposed by this amendment, with the "top two" advancing to the general, regardless of party affiliation.
I'm in favor of allowing NPA voters to vote in primaries, but not the way it's been proposed by this amendment, with the "top two" advancing to the general, regardless of party affiliation.
It's a rocket ship to one party rule. Within a single generation after California passed a similar measure, they now have no competition for anything outside of small enclaves in Orange County.
Voting NO on this amendment. Other than my reservations on this which have been stated above by Odessaman and George, this is just another bogus amendment that does NOT belong in our state's constitution.
I am voting NO on all of the amendments
I am voting NO on all of the amendments
chester field wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:39 pm In Pinellas, the registered voters are roughly 1/3 Democrat, 1/3 Republican, and 1/3 Independent/NPA. I wonder how many are declared party just because of closed primaries. Hopefully this will pass.
I completely disagree, why would you want the other party deciding your parties candidate?
This is how the Democrats have controlled CA for ever.
Let the people decide their parties nominee and the all residents vote in the general.
I voted NO on this one.
-
Captain Steinbrenner
- Posts: 289
- Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:28 pm
- Location: West Palm Beach
I voted no as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Same here, voted no. I don't like Sh$t sandwiches.
voting no on this, California is completely f'ed up due to having this
I found an excellent gun control law we should all follow. It's called the Second Amendment.