President Bush wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:13 am
I read this ruling standardized the practice of having the public/state run and pay for primary elections instead of the parties.
But it doesn't explain why there are primary elections at all.
As far as I know, the US is the only country in the world that has anything like our primary elections, and I don't think that makes us "more democratic", or gives the people more control, or results in candidates that are closer to what people would prefer.
The primary system is almost certain to give us Biden and Trump. It chases guys like Joe Manchin off the ballot at all. You have to be party pure in order to survive the primary, which often ends up with candidates so bad that they would lose to anyone except the guy that was nominated through the other party's system.
I kind of like Nicky Haley. I liked Amy Klobuchar four years ago. They each have great cross-party appeal compared to their in-party rivals, but they'll never get the nomination. Welll......maybe. Possibly? I'll hold out a little hope for Haley, but not much. Realistically, Trump has a lock, and even if he manages to do something so awful that even his base deserts him, I don't think Haley could win a primary contest.
Back to the main topic. I've read several editorials about whether or not Trump should be kept off the ballot by the 14th ammendment. The ones that sound sane say no. The ones in predictably left wing sources, like salon.com, who have to cater to their subscriber base, say that it's clear as day that the 14th ammendment applies, but they all sound like shrill partisan screeds. The ones that are written from a less emotional state all say that Trump will, and should, win the case. I must reluctantly concur.
I think that he showed, beyond all doubt, that he would be willing to oarticioate in an insurrection if he thought he could win, but I don't think he crossed the line into actually staging or participate in one.