Display:
it would still seem to me, a way of supressing minirity viewpoints.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Mon Jun 15th, 2009 at 01:09:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yep. It also enables a wider sense of party allegiance to apply in primaries (well, where primaries are still constrained even so). Which I don't think is a good thing -- the candidates of a party should be selected by those who involve themselves with politics deep enough, and show colours by becoming card-carrying members; otherwise, any programme can be watered up indefinitely and other parties may influence results on purpose, IMO.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jun 15th, 2009 at 01:58:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
OTOH, there are those who would argue that lacking primaries makes politics less accessible to the citizens at large. Ultimately, though, I think primaries give a largely false sense of participation - the party machinery can manage the outcome to a very large extent.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Jun 21st, 2009 at 05:04:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series