ELECTION PRIMARIES—PHOOEY!
Yes, dummy that I am, I went over to my precinct voting place to cast my vote for the candidate I wanted to make the “final round” and be one of the candidates for the November election.
While I have never missed an opportunity to vote in a national election since 1972, I admit I have never voted in a primary but once. Now I remember why. What a rigged-up deal that whole sham is!
I have no idea and frankly, I don’t give a fat rat’s tail WHO thought voting for candidates in only one party (especially when LOCAL candidates’ names are also on the ballot) is a good idea, but whoever it was ought to be hung up by his go-nads! And yes, “HIS” is exactly what I mean to say, because I’m willing to bet some male person dreamed up this concept for making dang certain only one “party” would eventually be dominant in the November elections.
Seriously, think about this. I knew who I was going to vote for—in the federal as well as the local elections. Unfortunately—the ballot box wouldn’t accept it! Why? Because the person I voted for in the Senate race was not of the same party I was voting for in the local legislative election! Why it makes a difference to anyone I still have no clue, but for whatever reason, “dem’s de rules” and that’s the way it is. Yet, ask anyone who cares about elections and who is being voted in or out of office, and most will tell you that “Primary” elections are a total waste of time and money, are completely antiquated and should be omitted from the process once and for all!
When the ballot box rejected my ballot for “error” voting due to the fact that I didn’t vote one straight party line, I opted to cancel the entire ballot and left.
Politics in America is anything but “democratic” and if “we, the people” don’t start standing up and rebelling LOUDLY about some of these ridiculous notions that were dreamed up before the majority of us voting today were even born, there may come a time in the not-so-distant future when NO ONE will care at all. Lord help us when that day arrives!
My question is, why do we even need the DFL or RNC or “parties” at all? When candidate “A” gets to Washington, he or she should not be more concerned about who is “red” versus who is “blue” when voting on legislative bills. My Senator and Representative should be voting on what is the best idea for my state—and for the country as a whole, not because someone in the same “party” wrote and promoted the bill. When I choose a person to be the President, I don’t want him to be a “red” or a “blue” or a “green” or a polka-dot. Isn’t the President supposed to be EVERYONE’S President? Isn’t the President the person who is to represent ALL Americans? Then why is he mandated to be part of a dysfunctional “two- party” system that does nothing but infighting and swapping “gimme” votes? That’s NOT representing “we, the people.” That is sucking up to the people with a lot of moola who keep pumping greenbacks into elections so they can buy whatever it is they want, regardless of the eventual outcome to the country as a whole.
“We, the people” absolutely must DO something to get this whole mess back on track and stop the selling out of America. The first thing we could insist on – and we have the power to do this by boycotting or protesting – is that no media outlet, be it radio, T.V., website, or print, may broadcast or publish ANY campaign ads until the election is five or six months away. Meaning: NO CAMPAIGNING before June for whatever election is to be held the following November. Geeze—today they ALL start nine months to a year in advance. Is it any wonder that the electorate HATES election years? By the time November elections actually arrive, everyone is sick to death of hearing about ALL of it. Not to mention this is the major reason elections are so impossibly expensive. If candidates, including Presidential candidates, only had to concern themselves with rounding up six months of ad campaign money and travel money—it certainly would be a boatload cheaper than what they have to pump into a campaign today!
For a Presidential candidate, yes, across-the-country campaigning is necessary, and so is being able to take “X” amount of donations from whomever is willing to donate to them. This should not be the case with Representatives and Senators running for office.
Secondly, NO PACS. NO “SUPER” funds. If candidates cannot muster enough funding on a LOCAL basis within their own state, hey! They probably shouldn’t be running, because that usually means the people within their state DON’T WANT THEM ELECTED! This b.s. about “only those who can raise money” are those who already have money is exactly that! It can be done. It HAS been done. Not in recent memory, maybe, and certainly not in the last three decades, but it has been done. Why should some yo-ho in New York, who owns a huge widget company and promises the head of a conglomerate oil company or insurance company or credit card CEO with “connections” in “high places” three thousand miles away, be able to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to someone running for a Senate seat in Minnesota or North Dakota? THEY SHOULDN’T!
Funding for ALL elected government seats should be from the people they will represent — the people in THEIR OWN respective states! I don’t care if Doug Burgum or Steve Scheel or Howdy Doody gives money to Heitkamp or Berg. I DO care if they give money to a candidate in a different state. Why? Because they are buying a “party candidate,” but not necessarily the person who will best represent the people in a state that candidate doesn’t live in. That is not anywhere close to equal or fair representation for the people. All that equals to is buying a candidate who will vote in favor of whatever might make more money for them. And that is what has happened in every election, in every state, for decades. We have all seen where that’s led us. Still think it’s working to the benefit of the “average” American?
The third issue gets back to the media’s responsibilities. Access. Yes, it’s prudent and necessary that all candidates in all elections – local dog catcher all the way to the President – have access to the media and the ability to get their message to the people. However, it cannot be for only those who can afford it. Every candidate should be allowed only “X” number of ads and interviews and promotions, and the cost MUST be the same for every single candidate.
The major networks and cable stations can have as many debates as they want, but there MUST be equal time for each and every national candidate running for President.
There was a time in America when people got revved up and excited about national elections. Today? All I hear most of the time is complaints about how long the election campaigning goes on, and how dirty and sniping the campaign ads are, and “did you hear what So-and-so said about his brother/sister/mother/father?”
We, The People in our country deserve better than what we’re seeing and getting. And it is beginning to appear that the only way we will get it is by demanding it. So if you are unhappy with politics today, with how elections are being run and with the candidates we’re left having to choose between, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. START PROTESTING. Write letters to the editors of your local newspapers, the free publications in your area (The EXTRA will print them, I promise), The HPR, or go on the local airwaves and tell the media heads how you feel. Start a blog, make statements on Facebook—but don’t just sit back and accept the status quo.
Nothing EVER gets changed with passivity. Nothing ever gets better when good people do nothing.
Questions and comments can be sent to: sooasheim@aol.com or tfinney@ncppub.com