Florida to consider ban on party-switchers

[Pangloss]

Pangloss, five days ahead is not "well in advance", up to half your electorate may have already voted.

 

My point wasn't really that it was a good thing but that it was fair. I bet if we ratchet back the timeline far enough we can find all kinds of things that it wasn't "fair" for Marco Rubio and his team of religious zealots to do to Charlie Crist, too. But that's politics for you. The Big Game.

 

This argument is somewhat ironic coming from the right. There's a reason we don't pass a law to stop every slimy thing politicians can do to get re-elected. I would think that small-government types would understand the advantages of letting a market correct itself when bad things happen.

[jackson33]

Marco Rubio and his team of religious zealots to do to Charlie Crist, too. [/Quote]

 

Pangloss, this is where I thought your perceived problems were coming from, not so much the religious angle, but the traditional Republican Establishment losing control. Where this is a valid discussion and an important issue (3rd party or combined), I have no answers as to what the future might hold. You probably already know I claim to be agnostic and believe in secular governance, but understand those governing will likely be religious, I'll live with that.

 

From my post #8.

Pangloss, I think your unintentionally arguing the Republican Establishments(pundits/money/ideology/moderates) argument, their leaders fearing the "so called" Tea Partiers" and their influence (conservatism) into their system. I have no idea how this will work out, but in the years to come, either the Republican Party will become MORE conservative (seems the likely choice) or a new party will take over their base, which I believe is currently 20% of the American electorate...[/Quote]

 

Now as for Rubio's or the Tea Party Political Agenda, they may appear religious zealots to non religious folks, but then so have been most of any, we individually recognize as great leaders have, been personally religious. In fact to qualify on my list of potential candidates to lead this Nation, the ability to inspire the electorate is a must and to do this, must inspire folks from all religions.

 

Those involved in what is classified the "Tea Party" (including Rubio) by enlarge profess Conservative Ideology, Constitutional Rule, yes smaller Government, fiscal responsibility and IMO the main idea that Government remains by the people, not control of the people (who works for who).

 

This argument is somewhat ironic coming from the right. There's a reason we don't pass a law to stop every slimy thing politicians can do to get re-elected. I would think that small-government types would understand the advantages of letting a market correct itself when bad things happen. [/Quote]

 

Keep in mind, except for House Members, Federal Representatives (P-VP-Senators) all came from State Legislatures, who were elected by the qualified members of their States. Even then what's classified 'the electorate' has moved from Qualified Land Owners (vested interest in the Nation) to whomever is breathing over 18 (most with only personal interest). This process still less than 100 years old and problems have come up all along the road, as has the power of the Federal Government over the people/States (I consider the same). Rules to the process for an orderly expression of the State, as designed by the State are as "right wing" (conservative) as you can get.