Quantcast

Comments about ‘In our opinion: Nominating candidates’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Jan. 11 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

Who writes the headlines?

The headline on the Opinion Page reads: "Nominating candidates: Utah's unique system of nominating works well."

But the editorial is the exact opposite of this.

I have noted several headline problems over the past few months.

Someone needs to pay more attention.

DN Subscriber 2
SLC, UT

Keep the present system. It does indeed work well.

Opponents fall into several grumpy groups:

1- Media organizations who profit handsomely from running political advertising which would increase with more primaries.

2- Hack career politicians with lots of name recognition and lots of campaign cash who would be able to lure "low information voters"

3- Party insiders who like to make "deals in smoke filled rooms" to keep their pals in office.

4- Members of the opposition party which can work mischief by getting their supporters to vote for the opposition's candidate that THEY prefer.

Utah's delegate and convention system is a very fine method in which people who pay attention to politics and candidates careful scrutinize candidates, often with repeated personal contacts, not a couple of 30 second ads and a newspaper endorsement.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The real truth is that the nominating process works well only for the special interests who control our government. Over the years the politicians and their controllers have prevented the ordinary mass of people to elect government representatives. They have done this by only allowing a chosen few to be candidates and by putting up roadblocks prevent people from choosing candidates.

When a business is seeking an employee, they do not limit the candidates to a select few according to whether or not the candidate has a particular political philosophy, they generally go by ability, education, experience and suitability. Nor do they allow outside groups to choose who may be candidates, except for certain guilds, associations, unions, etc.

Any constitutionally qualified citizen should be able to post a resume for the government job of representing the people. And the requirement that he/she be rich should be removed. Campaigns should be abolished in favor of a written and published resume for each candidate.

PeanutGallery
Salt Lake City, UT

Re: DN Subscriber 2: Great comment. Well stated.

The headline and the editorial contradict each other. I agree with the on-line headline ("Utah's unique system of nominating works well"), but disagree with the editorial itself. Our nominating/delegate system works fine, and should be left alone.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

It absolutely does not. The Seagull Forum and their cronies essentially nominate the people who make the ballot. It ensure only the right wing extremists are elected when the majority of Utahns are a lot more moderate.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

Keep the current system.

As long as republicons are continually elected/re-elected, why change?

toosmartforyou
Farmington, UT

I kind of resent persons who complain about the system when they didn't make any effort on their own to attend a neighborhood caucus. They want to disenfranchise my participation, which requires some time and effort to sort out for whom I should place my support, and just holler that they are being ignored. In many cases, that's the right thing to do because government is shaped by those who show up and get involved. It's not for whoever can gripe the loudest and complain in front of a camera. If you want your views heard, GO TO THE MEETING and express yourself. You'd be surprised that perhaps many share your views. Over time, you'll be respected and gain insights that allow you to be a shaker, not just a squawker.

Utah_1
Salt Lake City, UT

The caucus system is the best way to make sure grass roots movements can work over large amounts of money. It is the only way someone with $100,000 can go against someone with $2,000,000 in election funds.

There were about 60,000 republicans in Utah that went to the neighborhood caucus elections in 2010 to elect the 3500 delegates. Add to those numbers to democrats and the primary elections and certainly the municipal elections didn't do any better in voter representation.

In 2012 the number showing up again doubled. You look at primary turnout and you will see that few voters would decide.

Most people that want the caucus system changed, there are exceptions, are frustrated that they don't have as much power as people that show up to the neighborhood election caucus meetings. It doesn't take money, you just have to show up.

What we need are more people getting involved earlier, not shutting down the system that protects us from power hungry people wanting to take over.

Utah_1
Salt Lake City, UT

If you are going to run as a democratic candidate, you have to comply with their rules. If you are going to run as a republican, you have to comply with their rules. If you want to run and not have those rules, you can run as an unaffiliated or independent. There are also 3rd party. This is an attempt to change the party rules by state law, bypassing the party and is even an attempt to change the law bypassing the legislature.

This will NOT create more participation. Between one of every 4 or 5 republicans attended their neighborhood election caucus meeting this last year. One is every three told a KSL poll they were involved or attending. There are 4000 state delegates that spend countless hours vetting candidates to be on the ballot. They are selected by those that attend the neighborhood election caucus meeting. You just have to come.

When people realize this will give them less of a chance to participate but give media and power brokers more, they will not sign any initiative. It sounds good, but so did the unethical reform proposed as "ethical reform" which was a power grab by a few.

Daniel Moir
Murray, UT

Yes change the system so that only the monied 1% can ever be the nominee and ordinary citizens are forever shut out of Utah politics. The system as is allows ordinary folks to meet with other folks and earn the support of thier friends and neighbors and become a nominee to just about any position one can imagine. With our current system a minimum wage earner could concievably become governor! Ordinary folks having the power of self determination is a good thing.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments