tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post2430167777636939367..comments2024-03-26T14:01:36.240-05:00Comments on Public Policy Polling: Looking at NC RepublicansTom Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06545052616714485196noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-37722987611933630142009-11-19T17:58:16.459-05:002009-11-19T17:58:16.459-05:00Josh,
I don't believe that there is a bur...Josh,<br /> I don't believe that there is a burden of proof in North Carolina. The requirements to vote in the primary is the responsibility of the party, as I understand it. If the party chooses to close the primary to all but registered Republicans, that is their prerogative.Jon A Firebaughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08320260348138263572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-18510059418274259702009-11-19T10:38:58.389-05:002009-11-19T10:38:58.389-05:00Idaho Republicans are in court now over a similar ...<a href="http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-idaho-gop-still-after-closed-primary.html" rel="nofollow">Idaho Republicans are in court now over a similar issue</a>. Of course, their system is completely open; allowing independents <i>and</i> Democrats to participate. The proponents of the open primary system have asked a simple question: Where's the proof that more moderate candidates have emerged from the open primaries of the last 36 years (the period in which the Idaho open primary has been in place)?<br /><br />If you are following the median voter theorem, then it is only logical to have a more moderate candidate for the general election is more "rational." But if those concerns take a back seat to ideological purism, then allowing independents to participate in the primary process is potentially problematic. <br /><br />Still, the burden of proof is on the NCGOP to demonstrate that they have suffered some injury due to the current electoral law regarding nominations. Have they?Josh Putnamhttp://frontloading.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.com