Community

General discussion

Locked

What makes a Republican/Democrat?

By cp7212 ·
I have read many posts and political "slurs" on TR about the Republican/Democrat debate. I HAD to register as Democrat because my father worked for the city government.

Religiously, I call myself a Christian, even though I believe in some parts of many religions. I find myself agreeing with both Republican issues and Democratic issues. I don't know whether to change my registration or leave it.

So, I ask you, what do YOU think makes a Republican or a Democrat? (Personally, I don't see why we have to register as one or the other.)

Thanks for your input.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I don't like that idea. . . .

by maxwell edison In reply to Follow up

.
....of Democrats voting in Republican primaries, and vice-versa.

What a great way for a party loyalist to help select a weaker opponent for the opposing party.

Collapse -

Dems voting in Repub primaries and vice versa

by M_a_r_k In reply to I don't like that idea. . ...

So can one person vote in the BOTH parties' primary?

Collapse -

I don't think so

by Cactus Pete In reply to Dems voting in Repub prim ...

I think you still only get to vote in one primary... But I also don't know all 50 states.

Collapse -

Seems like one party could sway the other's primary outcome

by M_a_r_k In reply to I don't think so

Consider this scenario: Republican party candidate Ramos is the only Republican presidential candidate. Democratic candidates Alfred and Bruce are in a dead-heat across the nation. Dem Alfred would likely trounce Ramos in the general election. But Ramos would likely trounce Dem Bruce. In a critical state like California or Texas with thousands of electoral votes, what would prevent the Republicans from telling their party members to vote in the Democratic primary, and to vote for Bruce, the guy that Republican Ramos would trounce in the general election? This sways the Democratic candidacy from Alfred to Bruce. Bruce goes against Ramos in the general election and gets trounced and we have a Repub prez instead of a Dem prez.

Collapse -

Yes

by Cactus Pete In reply to Seems like one party coul ...

That is one of the concerns.

Collapse -

In Chicago....

by NotSoChiGuy In reply to I don't think so

You can vote in both primaries, as often as you like. All it takes are the addresses of abandoned houses and names of deceased.

You've all heard of the Teflon Don...well, Daley is the NO SCARE MAYOR...feds won't ever be able to pin anything on him...he's the orginal pimp gangsta in the city!

Collapse -

Daley Machine

by Montgomery Gator In reply to In Chicago....

Sounds like what I had heard before. I understand the rule in Chicago is "Vote early and vote often" if you are part of the Daley Machine. :-)

I had heard that it was the dead vote in Chicago that made the difference for Kennedy vs Nixon in 1960. It seems that the Dead vote is one constituency the Democrats have locked up, and the Republicans just can't appeal to them.

Collapse -

No - Never in Both - Open or Closed

by maxwell edison In reply to Dems voting in Repub prim ...

.
Most states have what's called closed primaries, where only registered party members may vote in that party's primary election.

Some states, on the other hand, have open primaries, in which a voter may cast a vote in the primary of his/her choice, but not both.

So if there's a "shoe-in" Republican candidate, for example, who will face any one of a number of potential Democrat candidates, the Republican voter could take a pass on the Republican primary that year, and vote for the lesser of all evils, so to speak, in the Democrat primary; or he might want to case a vote for the Democrat candidate most likely to get beat by the Republican, or whatever other logic a voter might want to apply (or vice-versa, of course).

It's always one or the other, but never both.

And I don't like open primaries. I think a party's candidate should be selected by that party's members. If a person doesn't want to belong to a party, why should he/she have any say in who that party nominates for office, especially if it could be a measure to work against that very party?

Collapse -

One thing I've never understood; why have primaries and who foots the bill?

by sleepin'dawg In reply to No - Never in Both - Open ...

We don't have primaries in Canada and I do not understand the necessity of them in American politics. Who gets stuck paying for them??? I won't deny finding the process interesting but why have them at all. Why not go straight to conventions and have the various candidates slug it out on national TV. I would think the end results would be pretty much the same; the guy with the biggest bankroll, making the most TV attractive package, would win and nobody would have to listen to all the political drivel spread out over a couple of years. I am not criticizing but I am curious. BTW I'm posing this question to you Max because you can be counted upon for a balanced reply. A grasp of the necessity of the primary process is something which I think eludes most non-Americans, even those of us who work and have spent so much time there.

Dawg ]:)

Collapse -

Why Primaries?

by maxwell edison In reply to One thing I've never unde ...

.
In a simplistic kind of way, the task of choosing the party's nominee was once decided by the party elite and party bosses in the preverbal smoke-filled back-room, where mutual back-scratching and political pay-back was the rule of the day. The primary election system today shows the shifting of that process to the electorate itself.

I can't tell you the exact history behind it, without doing a little research, but the shift probably started in the late 1800s to early 1900s. Some states today still have the political caucus system, but the local political leaders and a wide selection of the electorate makes the selection instead of the heavy-weight political bosses.

In short, the primary system, for better or worse, puts more of the decision making power into the hands of the voters, and out of the hands of political insiders.

Who pays for them? Each state pays for its own election system with tax money collected from its citizens. Colorado pays for its elections; Texas pays for its elections; and so on. We have a federal election commission to oversee the states' elections to ensure their compliance with election laws.

Related Discussions

Related Forums