The First Amendment guarantees every citizen’s right to assemble in political parties with freedom to participate in all party activities, including NOMINATING CANDIDATES for public office, without government interference.
Primaries deprive citizens of their First Amendment right, UNDER COLOR OF LAW, that being government sponsored public opinion surveys, AKA, primaries.
Ran across this belatedly, I think the reform actually failed in Colorado? You overlooked the most important (theoretical) justification for ranked choice voting - opening up the field for other parties besides the top two. I don’t think anyone expects to get rid of political parties - impossible, illegal, unwise, argue whichever one you want. Rather, the goal is to have MORE of them. That way if, say, the second most popular party in the country implodes, another party that’s more functional will take their place.
Once parties switched to a primary system, they already lost power. While I agree that smoked-filled rooms would be better at shutting out authoritarian tin-pot dictator wannabes, I don't actually see this being worse. If your main concern is shutting out an American caudillo (instead of strengthening parties just for the heck of it), this may actually be better.
Primaries are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, period.
The First Amendment guarantees every citizen’s right to assemble in political parties with freedom to participate in all party activities, including NOMINATING CANDIDATES for public office, without government interference.
Primaries deprive citizens of their First Amendment right, UNDER COLOR OF LAW, that being government sponsored public opinion surveys, AKA, primaries.
Ran across this belatedly, I think the reform actually failed in Colorado? You overlooked the most important (theoretical) justification for ranked choice voting - opening up the field for other parties besides the top two. I don’t think anyone expects to get rid of political parties - impossible, illegal, unwise, argue whichever one you want. Rather, the goal is to have MORE of them. That way if, say, the second most popular party in the country implodes, another party that’s more functional will take their place.
Once parties switched to a primary system, they already lost power. While I agree that smoked-filled rooms would be better at shutting out authoritarian tin-pot dictator wannabes, I don't actually see this being worse. If your main concern is shutting out an American caudillo (instead of strengthening parties just for the heck of it), this may actually be better.