Open primaries, the GOP idea, can only help GOP and other non Democratic Party loyalists.

[Eliot Rosewater]

It is simple, really.

An open primary in a red state (are there any?) wont work in reverse for the blue team because republicans would NEVER allow their field to be crowded by too many candidates thus causing an issue where not one of them gets enough votes to be on the ballot in November. Granted, with the creation of the teaparty/freedumb caucuses by rightwing billionaires, it is more possible now than 15 years ago, but very unlikely.

In a blue state however, TOTALLY different ballgame. Crowding the field with 6 to 8 candidates, which will happen believe it or not, can create the DESIRED outcome of electing a repub or someone who isnt really a Democrat but pretends to be.

I say DESIRED because just look at who WROTE the proposition in California, for instance:


It was authored by State Senator Abel Maldonado,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abel_Maldonado

Abel O. Maldonado Jr. (born August 21, 1967) is an American politician of the Republican Party

Ask yourself, WHY would a republican do this? I know, do you?

[NCTraveler]

1. +1

Some people dismiss it because it is difficult to quantify the crossover. One of the least intellectual arguments I have seen.

End open primaries.

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. We are a two party system, open primaries are stupid in a 2 party system.

Well, not stupid if you figured out how to use them to your advantage, which we can never do.

[NCTraveler]

3. The National Review seems to like them.

What do you have against them?

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. How in the hell did CA fall for this shit? I think I know.

[lunasun]

5. There are open primaries that result in 1 D and 1 R . CA is basically non party results