So, let me get this straight. A left wing nutcase "whining" about the top two system? What the hell do you want? Maybe the idiots who try non-stop to destroy this state should just be able to appoint who they want in the congress.... You're like a kid with an ice cream cone whining because it's not big enough.

If Republicans pick up any seats it will be because people FINALLY realize that the road we've been going down for years reeks of failure.

Yeah, WingnutSteve, and I am sure you can point to all that massive success created by right wing economics --- you know, the 1929 Wall Street Crash followed by the Great Depression; the 2008 collapse of the Wall Street casino, the greatest wealth disparity since the 1920s, outsourcing, oil industry subsidies, endless war, and taxing billionaires at less than half the rate their secretaries pay.

If the GOP really had something of substance to offer, why do they constantly lie about the impact of their own policies? Why do they repeatedly have to find phony issues, like the contrived, and baseless, claim that the President was not born in the US?

And, if their policies are so successful, why do they need to run stealth candidates, not only here in the CA 26, but in the WI Recall elections?

Those are rhetorical questions. I really don't anticipate a cogent response from someone so Blinded by the Right, that he uses "Wingnut" as a self-description.

Wingnut is the name you gave me Ernie. I'm no more a right wingnut than you are.

The point is you whining about a system set up by the left wing establishment designed to ensure their continued dominance of the failed welfare state known as california. Because (horrors!) the GOP may still possibly win an election. Cry me a river......

Describing a system as undemocratic just because it's likely to lead to a result you don't like is a bit disengenuous.

Here's an even better solution than repealing Prop 14: If a party wants to run an internal primary, it can do so on its own dime instead of having the state of CA pay for it.

WingNutSteve wrote:

... set up by the left wing establishment designed to ensure their continued dominance of the failed welfare state known as california

California by itself is about the 9th largest economy in the world. Where does your state rank?

California did well with more Liberal governance, but has fallen very far with governors like Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenneger.

Oh, great solution, NateTG. Bad enough the electoral process should be skewed by corporate monies and Super PACs. Now you want to add an additional expense to the Democratic Party for a pre-primary so that they can accomplish what Koch et al can accomplish by fiat --- the selection of a single "party candidate" to run in what is supposed to be a "primary election."

One wonders whether you and and self-named Wingnut Steve would have the same attitude if we came up with an example where the numbers and party affiliation were reversed.

WingnutSteve @ wrote:

The point is you whining about a system set up by the left wing establishment designed to ensure their continued dominance of the failed welfare state.

Oh, so the primary system that, except in the Jim Crow South, existed in this country for more than 200 years was set up by "the left wing establishment." Got a cite that supports your novel claim?

What left wing establishment? The "left" (aka the people who support the anti-war movement, Occupy Wall Street, single-payer healthcare, etc.) have never been part of the "establishment." The political elites who do make up the "establishment" are the billionaire class, the GOP and by the corporate sector of the Democratic Party.

Truly amazing that you deny being right wing and then immediately proceed to lay down a hard-right talking point. What you and the billionaire-funded 'Tea Party' denigrate as "the welfare state" is, in fact, what the U.S. Constitution describes as a core purpose of government --- "to promote the general welfare."

Note the emphasis on "general." The GOP is all for one form of welfare --- "corporate welfare" via billions in government subsidies, tax breaks, bailouts of Wall Street, etc.

I bet you are just a joy to be around Ernie. And you prove my point when I said you gave me my name with your response to Nate. His crime? Disagreeing with you. His punishment? He gets lumped in with me. Which is a carbon copy of when we first crossed paths. If he disagrees with you again, survey says: NAME CALLING! You're the weird french soldier in The Holy Grail, "Go away or I'll taunt you again". So I changed my name to wingnut Steve to honor your childishness. But you can't name one issue where a reasonable person would consider my response to be in the wingnut category.

The left wing establishment has a powerful hold on California (my home state Mark) Ernie. They may not be as nutty as you (thank god for that). As to your Jim crow, Koch brothers, and all yor other progressive gibberish if I wanted to hear a dumbed down version of Paul begala I'd turn on the TV. People like you are a dime a dozen

Mark H. First off Schwarzenegger was barely a republican. Secondly, his biggest failures came later as he went further and further left. Thirdly, the office of governor is greatly diminished when the governor is a republican and the legislature is solidly democrat. Which has been the case for years. Liberal governance is destroying this state.

Umm, steve? Quit while you're behind; you're embarrassing yourself and wasting our time with nonsense like this:

"But you can't name one issue where a reasonable person would consider my response to be in the wingnut category."

Which followed this EXAMPLE you just claimed he "can't name":

".....designed to ensure their continued dominance of the failed welfare state."

I doubt you even notice how you contradicted yourself, yet it's glaringly obvious to the rest of us. The use of blanket statements, complete with implicit mindreading regarding the motives and intent of others, is a sure sign of wingnuttery, not to mention your mischaracterization of CA's situation and the role the GOP anti-tax cult played in creating that situation.

>

The Democractic Party is neither a part of the government nor a service to the public, so why should it be funded by taxpayer dollars? Should I be able to start the NateTG Party or, more plausibly can Colbert start the "Steven Colbert Super PAC Party" and receive similar funding and a party primary?

WingnutSteve @10 wrote:

Schwarzenegger was barely a republican.

Just goes to show how far to the ideological Right one has to be to qualify as a Republican in the Wingnut mind.

I won't hold my breath waiting for Steve to actually provide a link or anything remotely resembling evidence to support his novel claim that the closed primary system that has existed in almost every state --- save the Jim Crow South --- for the past 200 years was set up by "the left wing establishment."

My friends in the Lone Star State have an apt description for those, like Steve, who persist with woefully uninformed but strongly held opinion --- All hat; no cattle.

Oh, one further point. WingnutSteve, in multiple comments, repeats the canard that since Democrats have consistently held a majority of seats in the Golden State's legislature --- imagine that, a state with a majority of registered Democrats actually elects Democrats --- that the "left wing establishment has a powerful hold on California."

I would recommend that all who are interested in facts --- as opposed to empty right-wing talking points --- read Engineering California's Economic Collapse.

Thanks to Prop 13, the CA legislature cannot pass a tax on corporations, billionaires, etc., without a two-thirds majority. This has permitted a minority of right wing ideologues to hold the state hostage.

Not only is the state's deficit the product of GOP economics, but a large portion of it was created when the Texas energy mafia (think Enron) swooped in to manipulate the CA energy market which had been deregulated under Republican Gov. Pete Wilson. Efforts by then Gov. Gray Davis (D) to remedy the situation were blocked by the Bush/Cheney cabal, as then action hero and future Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger met privately with junk bond swindler Michael Milken in Beverly Hills.

The CA right seized upon the deficit created by the gaping deficit created by the Texas energy mafia manipulation to advance a Recall of Gray Davis.

Those are the facts, WingnutSteve.

A better idea than a pre-primary might be just an allowance for a party to be able to endorse a candidate or multiple candidates as truly theirs on the ballot.

I personally like the idea of a primary where all candidates participate and where all voters are allowed to vote --- where ranked-choice ballots are used in order to defeat the spoiler effect and where any candidate who gets at least 15 percent of the vote using an Instant-Runoff Voting (IRV) style tabulation go forward to the general election.

This would be followed by a general election where voters again rank their choices and IRV is used to determine the consensus winner, in cases where no candidate gets a majority of the vote in the first round of voting. (Think Nader-Gore/Bush-Buchanan in Florida in 2000.)