Amazon.com Widgets
  • Primaries enable nomination through ignorance.

    Primaries enable extreme emotional voices to choose a candidate based on popularity rather than quality. The reality show unfolding here in 2016 is clear evidence. Leaving voting to politically engaged representatives in caucuses rather than public, open primaries, helps ensure qualified nominees go on to the conventions instead of the most sensational.

  • Not enough people really vote in primaries.

    People do simply do not take primaries seriously. Voter turnout in statewide primaries so far this year has been historically low, even among states with procedures designing to make voting more convenient.
    Overall, voter turnout among the 25 states that have held primaries is down 18 percent from the 2010 election, according a study by the Center for the Study of the American Electorate. There were almost 123 million age-eligible voters in these primary states, but only about 18 million of them voted.

    The ancient romans had a government similar to ours. When their people stopped participating whole heartedly they elected bad leaders and the Roman empire fell. Without the full participation of voters our government will rot from within.

  • Not enough people really vote in primaries.

    People do simply do not take primaries seriously. Voter turnout in statewide primaries so far this year has been historically low, even among states with procedures designing to make voting more convenient.
    Overall, voter turnout among the 25 states that have held primaries is down 18 percent from the 2010 election, according a study by the Center for the Study of the American Electorate. There were almost 123 million age-eligible voters in these primary states, but only about 18 million of them voted.

    The ancient romans had a government similar to ours. When their people stopped participating whole heartedly they elected bad leaders and the Roman empire fell. Without the full participation of voters our government will rot from within.

  • No They Shouldn't

    I do not believe primary elections should be abolished. I believe this system helps parties in the long run. Personally, within the United States, I think we just need more parties. Not one more party, but several more parties. I think we've been given bad choices for far too long.

  • No, primary elections should not be abolished.

    No, primary elections are a helpful process by winnowing the field of candidates before the general election. However, the primaries should be open, meaning that the top candidates advance to the general election even if they are members of the same party. This gives the general election more significance, particularly in states that are either heavily conservative or liberal.

  • Primary elections narrow down choices

    In the democracy that we have, it is much more beneficial for Democrats and Republicans to each post one nominee for President instead of multiple. In the scenario where Democrats put up 3 candidates, and Republicans put up 1, The 3 Democrats will all pull votes from the others because of slightly different beliefs. Say that these 3 each get 20% of the vote while the Republican pulls in 40%. It seems that most people want the Republican as President, but actually, 60% of the entire population does NOT want him or her. The overwhelming majority voted Democrat, but votes were dispersed between too many candidates. This is why the primaries are so important. They decide the candidate that will BEST pull in more overall votes, it is not about finding the perfect candidate.

  • Majority of Voters Need to Approve

    Primary elections shouldn't be abolished because a majority of voters must approve of a candidate before that person takes office. Primary elections weed the chaff. A general election should be between two candidates with a majority winner coming out on top. The only way a primary election could end an election is if one candidate gets more than 50 percent of one election and is unopposed from another party.

  • No they should not

    No, I do not think that primary elections should be abolished. Having primary elections are a fundamental part of our democracy, and allows every citizen who can vote and who registers to vote a voice when it comes to electing officials who are best qualifed to serve our great nation.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.