I don't have a dog in this fight, but...

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by BigV

<snip>

Please note that this does not pertain to the general election. Not only may a voter cast their ballot for either *party* ticket, but write-ins are also allowed. This "poison pill" is just for the primaries, so they can decide who can be called the Party's candidate. In WA, this prevented our largely blue state from voting for the most stupid, least likely to win red primary candidate (there's a term for this kind of defensive voting which escapes me at the moment).

I am not in favor of this Party only system for the primary election. I agree, it fucks over the small d-democratic process. I believe a proportional distribution of delegates, and eventually electors will dilute this poison.

V, let me disagree with you in these last 2 paragraphs... and talk only about the primaries.

It's sort of like the Boy Scouts of America. It seems some organizations should be open to all,
but because they are legal entities they have the right to say who can and who cannot be members.

Consider a minor party wanting to put forth it's candidate in accord with
it's own mission statement or ideals or preferences or whatever

But then the alternate (nefarious) approach of the local major party decides to flood
the primary selection process with it's own larger number of votes.

Tough, they say! The election is open to everyone to vote as a "small d" democracy.
And in the long run, bye bye minor parties.