[EM] Conceiving a Democratic Electoral Process

[Michael Allan]

> ...  Are P-Q-R-S-T separate groups (parties?), each with members
> making nominations? ...

They are primary processes, i.e. for selecting candidates prior to the
official election.  So the unreformed ones are party primaries, yes.

> ... When you say "at least two are reformed processes, are you
> speaking of groups with open nominations? ...

One could be the process you and Juho were mooting, and another could
feature open nominations, yes.

> ...  Are the percentages the percent of the groups' membership or of
> the entire electorate?

Of the entire electorate.

-- 
Michael Allan

Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
http://zelea.com/


Fred Gohlke said:
> Good Afternoon, Michael
> 
> In response to your July 29th post on a different thread:
> 
> re: "I guess we can safely assume that reforms (whatever they
>       are) will not begin with the official electoral process.
>       It is too difficult to change and too easy to circumvent.
>       What matters is the selection of candidates, namely the
>       primary electoral process.  Right?"
> 
> Yes, we are discussing a possible method of selecting candidates.  We 
> arrived at this particular idea by assuming that parties still operate 
> in more or less the same way they do today, but that everyone has the 
> right to nominate candidates for public office - party members within 
> parties and unrepresented people (in the 'party' sense) as a separate group.
> 
> 
> re: "Consider a point in the future at which there are five main
>       primary processes in operation at varying levels of turnout,
>       with at least two being reformed processes (your choice
>       which)."
> 
>              Process  Turnout
>              -------  -------
>                 P       20 %
>                 Q       15        (at least two are
>                 R        5        reformed processes)
>                 S        2
>                 T        1
> 
>       Is this expectation more-or-less reasonable?  Anyone?
> 
> Please help me with this one.  Are P-Q-R-S-T separate groups (parties?), 
> each with members making nominations?  When you say "at least two are 
> reformed processes, are you speaking of groups with open nominations? 
> Are the percentages the percent of the groups' membership or of the 
> entire electorate?
> 
> 
> re: "When you speak (Fred) of controlling the time at which
>       'candidates are announced', do you mean only for the process
>       that you and Juho are mooting, say one of P-T?  Or all
>       processes P-T?  Your purpose would seem to require control
>       of all the major primaries."
> 
> The concept we were examining imagined a single nominating process in 
> which partisans and non-partisans nominate candidates for public office. 
>   After being nominated, the nominees for each party (and the 
> non-partisan nominees as a group) decide which of the nominees are the 
> best advocates of the party's point of view.  Then, the remaining 
> partisan/non-partisan nominees examine each other to decide which of 
> their number will be the candidates for public office.  Then the people 
> vote for their choice of the candidates.  The question of how many 
> candidates there would be for each office was not discussed, and, 
> barring further discussion, would be left to those who implement the 
> process.
> 
> Fred