Comparison: The Panolian By John Howell

Although voters do not have an obligation publicly state which party they align with, they still must only align with one party during the primary. Therefore, their ballots do not present every possible candidate, and thus, their scope of presidential candidates is limited. The goal of a primary should be to reflect how the state will likely vote during the general election. Blanket primaries accomplish this by allowing voters to select the best candidate from every choice available. This also shows how certain candidates fair in comparison with other parties’ candidates. Parties still have the ability to nominate their candidate with the highest number of votes, but the blanket primary gives more power to the voters than to political parties. Political candidates must market themselves to voters as an aggregate in the state, and cannot rely on party affiliation to be a driving force come primary season. Therefore, while open and blanket primaries are extremely similar, it is the fact that blanket primaries allow more freedom for voters that makes them the favorable

     In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year’s election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

‘Breaking Free with Fair Elections’ we learn about the myth of that “Fair Elections systems force taxpayers to support candidates they do not like” when the reality is that taxpayers taxpayers who contribute to public funding are not paying for a candidate, but rather a fair chance for every candidate.

In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year's election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

As for Precinct 3 Commissioner Republican candidates, voters have a choice between two candidates who have experience in what might be considered unconventional and diverse scenarios that don’t include having held an elected office or working as a county

Over the last few decades, we have seen a shift in voter participation, and involvement in the election arena rather it be national, state, and or local levels. According to Time Magazine, 2014 mid-terms voter turnout was at a 72 year low. At only 36.4% of U.S, eligible voters voted in 2014 mid-terms, down from 40.9% that voted in 2010 mid-terms. Analyst views the decline as the “millennial generation” coming into effect, which clearly indicates the age group (18-33) seems to have a significantly lower turnout rate compare to the older age groups. With less participation in state and local elections, we now face decisions such as elections in South Carolina being cancelled if the incumbent as no challenge, according to Cindi Scoppe associate editor at “The State”. This doesn’t provide ample explanation considering that the mid-terms elections do in fact represent a significant portion of state-level elections, which ultimately allows individuals to experience policies being implemented at a much greater effect. So the questions arise are we happy with single file candidates ascending to the elected office with no election? Is it the lack of interest or it doesn’t matter who’s in the seat? What does this say about the public responsibility for electing these people as our representatives to make decisions that impact our daily lives?

A notorious voting option on Nevada ballots is “none of these candidates”, but is this option valuable to electing a new politician? Maybe it is, maybe it is not. However, it could be a way for voters to show disapproval for both potential candidates. As many know, the 2016 presidential candidates were both hated to rather high degree. Many voters on both ends of the political spectrum voiced their dissent for the candidate that opposed who they favored, but there were also many voters who realized that both candidates were not worth voting for. Therefore, an option like “none of these candidates” would be the most appealing option and a gift from the political gods. On the other hand, some may perceive it as an irrelevant choice on the ballot that could be replaced with another candidate or not even appear on the ballot at all. Although expressing disapproval for potential candidates is readily provided by Nevada elections, the unique option of “none of these candidates” may be a rather useless choice in a tight election and removal or reform of this choice should be considered for the sake of future elections.

In national elections we rely on national party labels to help us decide on who to vote for and in local and state elections we also rely on party labels. Another quote from the article that directly supports this statement is, “The reason is that even when the election is for local office, we still rely on national party labels.” The only problem with this is we end up still relying on national party labels instead. The last reason that this statement is true is because families might be favoring a certain party just because one candidate was exceptionally better than the other in one election. They might continue voting for the same party just because of that one year without actually listening to what the new presidential candidate has to say. This relates with local and state politics because if the family is already voting for a certain party they could also blindly vote for a local or state candidate without listening to them first, just like how they could’ve with the presidential

America is vastly known as a country boundlessly pursuing equality in all facets of life. In this seemingly endless quest for equal opportunity, there has been one lurking negation; our election system. The addition to equal representation in public funding and on the ballot will create variability and allow Americans to entrust their vote in a political format that more closely aligns with democratic philosophy. Therefore, a shift away from a bipartisan, a two party, dominated election system would not only be a healthy change for American electoral satisfaction, but for the future of third party politics. Unfortunately affluence and inherent wealth have played a large role in this divide between a true democratic election and our present biased, broken, and benyne system.

A major benefit of the open primary system is that the voters are able to vote for their favorite candidate rather than their favorite party. A voter may not always identify solely with one party or their views may not always closely resemble the views expressed by their established party. Therefore an open

After volunteering in the Mayor of Surprise’s office this past summer, I was shocked by the number of people who do not uphold their civic duties. Voting is a constitutional right that that should be used. The consequences

Recently, officials in Virginia initiated a solution to potential problems that could arise over ballots that are not marked clearly - that are not "easy" to count. Those officials developed a handbook for election officials. The state elected officials developed 12 guidelines that will be used to determine voter intent. However, I will describe six of the most important guidelines. (1) Voters that mark within the "target area" of the official ballot in the square, oval, or incomplete arrow next to the candidate's name. (2) If a voter does not mark within the target area and instead writes a candidate's name then it is s a part of the party to recount, as long as his name is written under that office. (3) A write-in vote for a candidate whose name appears on the ballot for the same office may not be counted. (4) If a voter makes a mark within

Voter turnout, as well as election results, depend upon and are effected by several different factors. Everything from family status to beliefs about abortion can determine how a person will vote. In my presentation, however, I focused on three aspects that effect voter turnout and elections. I found, in my research, that a voter's age, sex and party identification greatly factor into how a person will cast his or her vote.

Surprisingly, Rainn Wilson created a video portraying how antiquated the laws surrounding voting day are. The video explains why America votes on a Tuesday and how irrelevant it is to still practice voting on that day. Wilson also poked fun at the notorious voter identification laws which also have been proven to be fatuous. Wilson’s video helped provide a connection between how tedious and

Americans do not always get to vote for the candidate that they want during the primary election. For instance, states like California who vote later in the primary election, may find that they are forced to choose