Saturday, November 15, 2008


  • Democrats weigh how hard to hit agenda (Chicago Tribune) The coalition that put Obama in office depends on support he secured from independent voters.
  • What I've Been Saying for Weeks (American Spectator) if you incorrectly assume that the independent voter is a "centrist," you're going to miss the chance to make the libertarian populist argument.
  • Former GOP Sen. Chafee relishes Obama’s victory (The Providence Journal) In early September, Chafee campaigned in Florida as part of “Republicans and independents for Obama.”
  • The Center-Right Nation Exits Stage Left (Washington Post) And so far, center-left government is largely an abstraction for the country. People like the sound of it, especially against the backdrop of a financial crisis and recession. In these center-left times, voters are receptive -- or rather, it is their receptiveness that makes these times center-left.
  • Democrats' victories portend a new political era (By David S. Broder, Seattle Times) there are signs in this year's returns of voter shifts that could herald a new political era — and which certainly define the challenge facing the Republican Party.

1 comment:

Steve Rankin said...

The Contra Costa (CA) Times had a pro-"open primary" editorial on Nov. 13. Here's my response to it:

You neglect to mention that California voters defeated the "open primary" in November 2004, as Prop. 62 lost in 51 of the state's 58 counties.

The "open primary" also lost in Oregon on November 4, as 66%-plus voted against it.

What the US Supreme Court said about Washington state's "open primary" was that, on its face, it does not violate the associational rights of the political parties. The high court, however, left the door open for the "open primary" to be challenged on several other issues, which is why the federal litigation is ongoing.

If the "open primary" is such a great idea, why is it that only two states-- Louisiana and Washington-- use it to elect all of their state officials? And Washington alone uses it for its congressional elections.

Why should the voters be limited to just two choices in the final, deciding election?

~~ Steve Rankin
Jackson, Mississippi
Free Citizen