@ NoNames.... I have no doubt you are correct about the media not doing their
job with this regard. Don't challenge that at all.While living
in CA many years ago each household got a voters guide. I was in Santa Clara
County and the guide was usually pretty good with each candidate having to
provide details about their position. It was the best of all the like tools
I've seen in the places I've lived. Hopefully CA is still doing
this.But even that isn't my maid fear. What I dislike is the
party line voter. It could really make no difference what the person's
personal beliefs are, under a party line vote no thinking is required. I would
prefer people actually have to get to know the reality of who they are casting a
vote for.Today we have few candidates at the national level that
nicely fit any molds. Lee and Romney are worlds apart in some ways, and very
close in others. The same "should" be the same for local elections.
People should not be able to hide behind an R or a D. The R or D doesn't
tell you how Lee or Romney would vote all the time.. as it shouldn't. I want people choosing people - not a party. Well just have to agree
to disagree, and thats ok.
"We the people" just summarized exactly why no names and Redshirt are
completely wrong about partisan elections as well as exactly why they are for
them. Blind sheep in Utah who are too lazy to find out about candidates on
their own and expect the media to feed it to them. You don't trust the
media but you trust the party? Hilarious. How about contacting the candidates
yourself or going to their websites or you know showing up at a public event.
Nah...party will tell me what to do. Hilarious. Redshirt and no names are the
epitome of the extremists that influence partisan elections and are ruining Utah
and the United States and making us the mockery of the rest of the free world.
@UtahBlueDevil: "Sure.... if independent voices in the parties can be heard
and judged. "Utah has long had one of the easiest ballot access
laws in the nation. It is very reasonable for an independent to get onto the
general election ballot. It is not very hard at all to start a new party and get
it ballot access. Recall that the only problem the new UU party had was with
timing. They wanted ballot access in time for the special congressional
election. Had they been willing to wait for the normal election--or had they
started a few months earlier--their entire ballot access would have been nearly
trivial.Parties can't silence anyone. All they can do is deny
that candidate the party label. Any candidate can run as an independent, or
start a new party.Reasons independents don't get heard:1-The media refuses to cover them2-They lack sufficient funds to pay for
advertising3-They lack sufficient support to raise funds for
advertisingYour beef is not with political parties, but the media
that gives more coverage to high school baseball games than to State School
Board races. Making races partisan allows parties to do what the media has
failed to do: provide data to voters
Hasn't anyone noticed how hard it is to find good, credible information on
these minor nonpartisan elections? The candidates don't buy advertising,
and I don't trust the media.At least when the elections are
partisan, I know that the wise leaders who have been chosen for my Party have
taken the time to ensure that good responsible conservatives will be elected.
That means I know who to vote for!
"If Democrats or Independents put up better educational ideas than the GOP,
they will win. If not, they deserve to lose."Sure.... if
independent voices in the parties can be heard and judged. But you have seen
what happens at the national level if a Republican chooses to voice a statement
against the party platform candidate. They are branded RINOs, said they are
Democrats in hiding... blah, blah, blah. Reagan preached of a big tent
party... but that is a distant memory.If you have to turn an entire
party platform to get a new idea out, it will never happen. The financial
machines of both parties are too entrenched in the status quo. Sometimes its
a good thing - see whats going on in the Democrat party in trying to reign in
some of their newer representatives - who rightfully are pushing agendas to the
extreme. But also looking at when Romney says that some of the language used
by the President isn't appropriate, he is branded at a traitor to the
nation. Independent voices should be heard, not broad over
reaching party platforms. Not all dems want abortion, not all republicans hate
immigrants. Their voices need to be heard too.
In my opinion:Education of young people is Health Care for the mind.
Just like health care for our bodies, we should seek the widest sources of
intelligence for the best procedures.
@UtahBlueDevil: ".. injecting partisan politics makes things better....
anything"You might check the US Constitution, our very form of
government, the social contract that makes us a nation. It was the essentially
partisan rhetoric of the Anti-Federalists that forced the rapid addition of the
Bill of Rights. That is pretty roundly accepted as a huge improvement on an
already very good document. Fast forward some four score years and it was the
partisan politics of the GOP that added the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments,
ending slavery, ending 3/5ths of a person, & guaranteeing equal rights and
due process regardless of race.Partisan politics is nothing more
than competing, broad ideologies. These are good things.Fact is,
we've long had partisan politics in the school board, just without any
information to help voters know who held what views. Media coverage of these
races is almost non-existent. So conservative voters have too often ignorantly
voted for left wing candidates based on name recognition, not knowing their
positions. We get bad curriculum.If Democrats or Independents put up
better educational ideas than the GOP, they will win. If not, they deserve to
Red Shirt, thanks for proving that I am correct with your comment : "To
"one old man" conservatives are not afraid of educated voters. Your ilk
is afraid of kids that have not been indoctrinated through the public school
system."That is exactly what I'm saying.
I have yet found anything where injecting partisan politics makes things
better.... anything. Can our legislators tell me one thing that
was made better by injecting rhetoric generating side shows to the process?
Then again, I see the parties themselves not providing much value either. They
consume lots of money.... and produce very little benefit.Especially
for local and state elections - let people run against the ideas of other people
- not on a platform of party adherence and conformity.
To "Impartial7" but this would open up the field for candidates.The article complained about the candidates having to take on party
ideologies. But when you look at the candidates that ran last year, I don't
think that will be a problem. There were several seats that were uncontested.
Making this something that the parties get candidates for actually INCREASES the
number of candidates that can run.To "one old man"
conservatives are not afraid of educated voters. Your ilk is afraid of kids that
have not been indoctrinated through the public school system.
Conservatives are scared to death of well educated voters.School
kids grow up to be voters.If they are well educated, they will be
harder to fool.So let's make it easier to control what our
schools teach or don't teach.Yup.Got it.
The Utah GOP has to control everything and everyone. You can bet that if the
overwhelming majority in State government was Democrats, the GOP would be
screaming if they tried to make the School Board partisan. "Less