Future Election Primaries
I'm glad to see the USA Democratic Political Party has resolved who they expect to nominate as their Presidential candidate, Barack Obama. The National Republican Party had settled on John McCain as their expected candidate some time ago. Both political parties will officially designate their candidates this summer.
The original competing prospective Democratic candidates uniquely reflected gender and race differences. The expected final two national political party candidates have differing racial backgrounds, but that's just one factor making this year's Presidential election special in our country's history. I recognize, respect and honor that racial factor difference, but I don't intend to dwell on it any more than I would imagine the candidates see the need to do so. I hope they'll be allowed to focus their campaign efforts elsewhere in these months ahead.
I'm anticipating an election campaign that has the candidates debating the important issues that affect our daily lives and those of our country internationally, especially since all are so inter-related in todays' global economy.
Also, I hope the candidates, pundits, media-types and political junkies make every effort to keep the rhetoric focused on the pertinent issues through civil discourse.
We learned this year how election primaries can thwart our candidate selection process. I continue to condemn any primary election arrangements in future campaigns that prevent the electorate in any State from having the opportunity to vote for all the candidates. Rules that deprive individuals of their votes may be legal, but we saw in Florida and Michigan how convoluted government and/or political party manuevering adversely affected the rights of voters to participate in a meaningful primary election. We observed the muddled efforts to correct the problem after the fact. I believe in the rule of law -- ethical and moral application of just laws. Just because something is legal does not mean it's right and such limiting rules need to be changed, amended, eliminated, or whatever to protect all legal voters.
Voters in every State should protest loudly and clearly LONG BEFORE primary elections, should there be reason to believe they may be deprived of a legitimate meaningful primary election -- especially if circumstances develop as they did in Michigan and Florida this year with the Democratic Party candidates. If political parties and candidates are serious candidates, then each voter's ballot should provide the choice of selecting those candidates.
Candidates with their political parties are equally responsible to be certain they get their name on all States primary ballots for the sake of the voters and accurate primary election results.
Before our next primary elections I would welcome hearing others perceptions of the pros and cons of the various ways in which State primary elections are conducted.
My local California area uses the confidential election InkaVote ballot. I understand some other States use a much more open interactive caucus forum with which I have no first hand experience.
Is one of these systems preferable or superior to the other, and why?
Are there any other State primary election systems than these two types?
Just a reminder, we have about 21 more weeks until our November 2008 Presidential election date.
Lest anyone doubt it, this is a watershed year for change with much at stake for the everyday citizens of our nation and our democracy. We already know much about the Presidential candidates positions, but let's be certain we clearly understand their issue differences.
We want to make it strongly clear to all those chosen to represent our interests:
We demand accountability and expect our rights to be protected.