Primary Opposition

Yesterday was primary election day in Indiana.

I didn't vote.

I'm opposed to primary elections. I mean, I guess I'm not entirely opposed to the whole idea of them. I just think there are some fallacies involved.

I mean, I get that this is how each party determines which candidate is going to be on the official ballot. And I can see how the primary is a preferable alternative to not putting it out to the general public at all.

And I guess I can even see why primaries are split into party lines. As in, you can only vote Democrat or only vote Republican in a primary election. Otherwise, the system is open to more shenanigans that could be considered fraudulent at worst, or misleading at best. Like Limbaugh's Operation Chaos of the last Presidential election; where he encouraged like-minded conservatives and Republicans to vote in the Democratic presidential primary -- the Republican candidate was all but locked-in, so nothing to lose there; and by convincing more people to vote for Hillary, it kept her in the race longer and meant Obama wasn't able to declare primary victory as early -- thereby delaying his ability to focus on the next phase of campaigning. That kind of ploy is shameful and a mockery of the voting system.

BUT. By allowing only dedicated party supporters to vote in the primary, aren't we essentially guaranteeing that only hard-core party politicians will win? I mean, if a primary election is limited to only Democrats or those willing to vote only Democrat, then won't the results be skewed towards the more left-leaning of those candidates? And won't the Republican primary most likely result in a farther-right-wing candidate winning out over a more middle-of-the-road conservative?

I'm not a party supporter. I'm mostly conservative, and generally moderate on social issues.

I think the federal government should stay out of most things as much as possible. I think government is more effective on the state and local level, and less so on the federal level for lots of things.

I think too much interference in a capitalistic system just leads to government-sanctioned market selection, which I detest.

I would be more in favor of a universal health-care system, or public option, than the load of junk that we got in this latest health-care bill.

At any rate, my point is, I don't fit into a PARTY. I prefer it that way. But that means this primary election, as do most, meant nothing to me.

I wanted to vote for a Democratic candidate for mayor, and a Republican candidate for City Council. I can't do that in the primary election.

What does that mean? I can only vote for one of my preferred candidates; therefore I have to decide which race means more to me? I'm not able to voice my opinion for both?

So I didn't vote. Probably others didn't either.

Doesn't that mean that the most electable candidate, the one that appeals not only to the party base but also to independents, doesn't necessarily win? And wouldn't that be contrary to what the party wants?

I suppose there's not much I can do to change the system. But I'm taking my passive stand. By not voting.

And blogging.

Consider my duty served.