In 1796, Edmund Burke noted that, "Falsehood and delusion are allowed in no case whatsoever; but as in the exercise of all virtues, there is an economy of truth."
Fast forward 162 years to Oct. 15, 1958. In a speech to broadcast journalists, Edward R. Murrow said, "The fact that your voice, amplified to the degree to where it reaches from one end of the country to the other, does not confer upon you greater wisdom than when your voice reached only from one end of the bar to the other."
Good analysis but as far as primary elections are concerned the author leaves out one category of non-voter, which happens to be my own category. As a voter that is not a registered Democrat or Republican, I am not permitted to vote in primary elections. I fully understand the reasoning behind this exclusion, but when I lived in Virginia I could vote in primaries and I never saw a lot, if any, of people voting across political lines to 'sabotage' the other party's candidates - making sure your own candidate wins is far more of an incentive. I happen to believe that the rigid two party system is part of the problem, and the fact is that whenever a third party candidate is on the ballot, you can be sure that the Reps and Dems will suspend their hatred for each other long enough to ensure that the new party is crushed or unable to get onto the ballot. Too much money involved to risk other parties (of which there are 420 registered although not all run candidates) being able to snatch a piece of the power pie. Because I believe this behavior to be unamerican I register as 'other' in protest, and as such cannot vote in primaries. It is my choice, but we are the fastest growing group of voters (other) registering now and it is interesting that this author doesn't mention us.
Amen, Jeffrey Laird. Add to it that primary results skew toward the extremes, leaving general election choices even more blah. I hope that No Labels can field a candidate.
“…I never saw a lot, if any, of people voting across political lines to 'sabotage' the other party's candidates”, but that scenario can happen like when the Republicans have a weak primary candidate challenging an incumbent, so they are relatively assured that their candidate is safe…safe enough to gamble on playing the role of the spoiler, sticking it to the libs. I don’t see Democrats doing this, but the Republican have demonstrated that they are much more of a violent, win at all cost kind’a cult. I mean, they lie and cheat in every campaign/election, so what’s sabotaging the other party’s candidate? Small 🥔🥔🥔! And with the internet, it is a lot easier to organize something like that in your state than it used to be.
What I have noticed since Ralph Nadar was the protest 3rd party candidate, whenever a third party candidate is on the ballot, it almost always is a spoiler that negatively effects the Democrat candidate. Republicans fall in line, while Democrats fall in love!
It happens enough of the time and the elections have become such a life and death choice for our democracy, country and therefore, our planet, that I don’t dare risk it by playing with the protest card. The stakes just keep getting higher and higher, and the Republican candidates aren’t even close to getting my support in anything that is not a local race. No longer are we ever talking about the difference like between Pepsi and Coke. It’s like between Coke and strychnine! This stuff has become so serious.
I tell people, show me a decent human being that’s also a Republican and I may vote for them. But there simply aren’t anymore around. They’ve all gone BS crazy, full-bore MAGA!
Independents may be the fastest growing group of voters, I don’t know, but they also may be the death knell of the world as we know it.
State-Journal.com’s comments forum is for civil, constructive dialogue about news topics in our community, state, nation and world. We emphasize “civil” at a time when Americans, in the words of the current president, need to “turn down the temperature” of political debates. The State Journal will do its part by more carefully policing this forum. Here are some rules that all commenters must agree to follow:
Absolutely no attacks on other commenters, on guest columnists or on authors of letters to the editor. Our print and online opinion pages are sacred marketplaces of ideas where diverse viewpoints are welcome without fear of retribution. You may constructively critique the ideas and opinions of others, but name-calling, stereotyping and similar attacks are strictly prohibited.
Leeway will be given for criticism of elected officials and other public figures, but civility is essential. If you focus your criticism on ideas, opinions and viewpoints, you will be less likely to run afoul of our commenting rules.
Keep comments focused on the article or commentary in question. Don’t use an article about the Frankfort City Commission, for example, to rant about national politics.
Hyperpartisanship that suggests anyone on the other side of an issue or anyone in a particular particular party is evil is not welcome. If you believe that all Democrats are socialists intent on destroying America or that all Republicans are racists, there are lots of places on the internet for you to espouse those views. State-Journal.com is not one.
No sophomoric banter. This isn’t a third-grade classroom but rather a place for serious consumers of news to offer their reactions and opinions on news stories and published commentary.
No consumer complaints about individual businesses. If you’ve had a bad experience with a private business or organization, contact the Better Business Bureau or the government agency that regulates that business. If you believe the actions of a private business are newsworthy, contact us at news@state-journal.com and we will consider whether news coverage is merited.
Absolutely no jokes or comments about a person’s physical appearance.
No promotion of commercial goods or services. Our outstanding staff of marketing consultants stands ready to help businesses with effective advertising solutions.
If you state facts that have not been previously reported by The State Journal, be sure to include the source of your information.
No attacks on State Journal staff members or contributing writers. We welcome questions about, and criticism of, our news stories and commentary but not of the writers who work tirelessly to keep their community informed. Corrections of inaccurate information in news stories should be sent to news@state-journal.com rather than posted in the comments section.
Post a comment as anonymous
Report
Watch this discussion.
(4) comments
Good analysis but as far as primary elections are concerned the author leaves out one category of non-voter, which happens to be my own category. As a voter that is not a registered Democrat or Republican, I am not permitted to vote in primary elections. I fully understand the reasoning behind this exclusion, but when I lived in Virginia I could vote in primaries and I never saw a lot, if any, of people voting across political lines to 'sabotage' the other party's candidates - making sure your own candidate wins is far more of an incentive. I happen to believe that the rigid two party system is part of the problem, and the fact is that whenever a third party candidate is on the ballot, you can be sure that the Reps and Dems will suspend their hatred for each other long enough to ensure that the new party is crushed or unable to get onto the ballot. Too much money involved to risk other parties (of which there are 420 registered although not all run candidates) being able to snatch a piece of the power pie. Because I believe this behavior to be unamerican I register as 'other' in protest, and as such cannot vote in primaries. It is my choice, but we are the fastest growing group of voters (other) registering now and it is interesting that this author doesn't mention us.
Amen, Jeffrey Laird. Add to it that primary results skew toward the extremes, leaving general election choices even more blah. I hope that No Labels can field a candidate.
“…I never saw a lot, if any, of people voting across political lines to 'sabotage' the other party's candidates”, but that scenario can happen like when the Republicans have a weak primary candidate challenging an incumbent, so they are relatively assured that their candidate is safe…safe enough to gamble on playing the role of the spoiler, sticking it to the libs. I don’t see Democrats doing this, but the Republican have demonstrated that they are much more of a violent, win at all cost kind’a cult. I mean, they lie and cheat in every campaign/election, so what’s sabotaging the other party’s candidate? Small 🥔🥔🥔! And with the internet, it is a lot easier to organize something like that in your state than it used to be.
What I have noticed since Ralph Nadar was the protest 3rd party candidate, whenever a third party candidate is on the ballot, it almost always is a spoiler that negatively effects the Democrat candidate. Republicans fall in line, while Democrats fall in love!
It happens enough of the time and the elections have become such a life and death choice for our democracy, country and therefore, our planet, that I don’t dare risk it by playing with the protest card. The stakes just keep getting higher and higher, and the Republican candidates aren’t even close to getting my support in anything that is not a local race. No longer are we ever talking about the difference like between Pepsi and Coke. It’s like between Coke and strychnine! This stuff has become so serious.
I tell people, show me a decent human being that’s also a Republican and I may vote for them. But there simply aren’t anymore around. They’ve all gone BS crazy, full-bore MAGA!
Independents may be the fastest growing group of voters, I don’t know, but they also may be the death knell of the world as we know it.
Interesting as always !
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
State-Journal.com’s comments forum is for civil, constructive dialogue about news topics in our community, state, nation and world. We emphasize “civil” at a time when Americans, in the words of the current president, need to “turn down the temperature” of political debates. The State Journal will do its part by more carefully policing this forum. Here are some rules that all commenters must agree to follow:
Absolutely no attacks on other commenters, on guest columnists or on authors of letters to the editor. Our print and online opinion pages are sacred marketplaces of ideas where diverse viewpoints are welcome without fear of retribution. You may constructively critique the ideas and opinions of others, but name-calling, stereotyping and similar attacks are strictly prohibited.
Leeway will be given for criticism of elected officials and other public figures, but civility is essential. If you focus your criticism on ideas, opinions and viewpoints, you will be less likely to run afoul of our commenting rules.
Keep comments focused on the article or commentary in question. Don’t use an article about the Frankfort City Commission, for example, to rant about national politics.
Hyperpartisanship that suggests anyone on the other side of an issue or anyone in a particular particular party is evil is not welcome. If you believe that all Democrats are socialists intent on destroying America or that all Republicans are racists, there are lots of places on the internet for you to espouse those views. State-Journal.com is not one.
No sophomoric banter. This isn’t a third-grade classroom but rather a place for serious consumers of news to offer their reactions and opinions on news stories and published commentary.
No consumer complaints about individual businesses. If you’ve had a bad experience with a private business or organization, contact the Better Business Bureau or the government agency that regulates that business. If you believe the actions of a private business are newsworthy, contact us at news@state-journal.com and we will consider whether news coverage is merited.
Absolutely no jokes or comments about a person’s physical appearance.
No promotion of commercial goods or services. Our outstanding staff of marketing consultants stands ready to help businesses with effective advertising solutions.
If you state facts that have not been previously reported by The State Journal, be sure to include the source of your information.
No attacks on State Journal staff members or contributing writers. We welcome questions about, and criticism of, our news stories and commentary but not of the writers who work tirelessly to keep their community informed. Corrections of inaccurate information in news stories should be sent to news@state-journal.com rather than posted in the comments section.