AllPosters.co.uk - The World's Largest Print and Poster Shop!
• Closed. People may vote in a party's primary only if they are registered members of that party. Independents cannot participate. Note that because some political parties name themselves independent, the term "non-partisan" often replaces "independent" when referring to those who are not affiliated with a political party.
• Semi-closed. As in closed primaries, registered party members can vote only in their own party's primary. Semi-closed systems, however, allow unaffiliated voters to participate as well. Depending on the state, independents either make their choice of party primary privately, inside the voting booth, or publicly, by registering with any party on Election Day.
• Open. A registered voter may vote in any party primary regardless of his own party affiliation. When voters do not register with a party before the primary, it is called a pick-a-party primary because the voter can select which party's primary he or she wishes to vote in on election day. Because of the open nature of this system, a practice known as raiding may occur. Raiding consists of voters of one party crossing over and voting in the primary of another party, effectively allowing a party to help choose its opposition's candidate. The theory is that opposing party members vote for the weakest candidate of the opposite party in order to give their own party the advantage in the general election. An example of this can be seen in the 1998 Vermont senatorial primary with the election of Fred Tuttle for the Republican candidate.
• Semi-open. A registered voter must not publicly declare which political party's primary that they will vote in before entering the voting booth. When a voter identifies their self to the election officials, they must request a party's specific ballot. Only one ballot is cast by the voter. In many states with semi-open primaries, election officials or poll workers from their respective parties record each voter's choice of party and provide access to this information. The primary difference between a semi-open and open primary system is the use of a party-specific ballot. In a semi-open primary, a public declaration in front of the election judges is made and a party-specific ballot given to the voter to cast. Certain states that use the open-primary format may print a single ballot and the voter must choose on the ballot itself which political party's candidates they will select for a contested office.
• Run-off. A primary in which the ballot is not restricted to one party and the top two candidates advance to the general election regardless of party affiliation. (A run-off differs from a primary in that a second round is only needed if no candidate attains a majority in the first round.)
There are also mixed systems in use. In West Virginia, Republican primaries are open to independents, while Democratic primaries were closed. However, as of April 1, 2007, West Virginia's Democratic Party opened its voting to allow "individuals who are not affiliated with any existing recognized party to participate in the election process".
Saturday, May 9, 2009
IS THERE NEED FOR 2010 COMPUTERIZATION?
Only by end of May will we know for sure if the computerization of 2010 Philippine elections will be pushed through or not. This is the statement of Director Jaime Jimenez, Comelec director over a DWIZ radio program. He told the hosts, Jarius Bondoc and Marissa that the 7 bidders who applied were all disqualified during the hearing this week but have been given a chance to apply for reconsideration. Some of the reasons for disqualification were lack of necessary papers, among others. Rumors are rife though that the disqualification could be going towards two things: 1. go for a negotiated contract meaning to say there will be no more biddings to be done but only negotiations for the activity of computerizing the elections (which could also mean that this would be costlier than bidding it out); and 2. a return to manual voting and counting of ballots.
The bidding was observed by groups like the Transparency International, Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting or PPCRV, Procurement Watch, and the government agency, Commission on Audit.
Consequences of having no computerization are: 1. election cheating through miscounting or "dagdag-bawas" and 2. corollarily, installing fake officials; 3. more work for the judiciary to resolve election protests;AND 4. another era of repeated poor governance of public coffers and poor implementation of programs and projects for the poor, the marginalized and disadvantaged sectors of our society, especially the senior citizens, the children, women, and disabled.
by Wilhelmina S. Orozco with data culled from the RADIO PROGRAM: "SAPUL" hosted by Jarius Bondoc and Marissa, Saturday, 10 May 2009, aired between 8:15 to 9 a.m.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Mastering the Art of Opposing
The Opposition should master their arithmetic if they are to win in 2010. The logic behind their concept of addition and division is terribly flawed.
Also, the Opposition should brush up on their Marketing 101. Politics is very much the social science of Marketing. But the way the Opposition is wittingly or unwittingly creating disincentives, one gets the impression that they are promoting the status quo.
Politicians swear by their mantra of “politics is addition” and yet they miscalculate that some additions result in corrosive divisions. When you attract divisive personalities into your ranks, you do not add to your numbers but drive some of your diehards away.
Without even taking into consideration that the Opposition could be infiltrated by Administration double agents, they are displaying mindsets and behavior that could only bring them to political defeat. The single biggest flaw of the Opposition is to think that the 60 to 70% of Filipinos who desire a regime change are theirs no matter what they say or do.
Just because 70% of Filipinos have decided to stop riding in jeepneys - that does not mean that the bus operators automatically get these jeepney riding commuters. The commuters can opt to ride on the MRT, LRT, tricycles or simply walk.
Nissan cannot presume that all disgusted Honda car users will automatically shift to Nissan. The mango growers cannot presume that all those who decided to stop eating bananas will automatically shift to mangoes.
In politics, voters can always look at other alternatives. Or they can see the government as the lesser evil if the so-called alternatives fail to present a convincing case for change. We all saw how bad a US president George W. Bush was during his first term. And yet, Bush got re-elected simply because the Democratic Party candidate - John Kerry - failed to present a convincing case for change.
There are too many signs that the current Opposition to the Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA) regime is likely to do worse than what John Kerry did in 2004 in the US. Instead of reinforcing their ranks, the Opposition is self destructing. Their current intramurals will only leave battered, weakened warriors to fight the powerful GMA machinery.
The Opposition presidential wannabes are deluded in thinking that the GMA camp is so badly discredited and has absolutely no chance of winning in 2010.
They’ve overlooked the fact that, even during her worst ratings in the SWS and Pulse Asia surveys, GMA has consistently managed to maintain a 25% support base. They’ve overlooked the fact that under our multi-party system, 25% is not very far from the votes of winning presidential candidates in 1992 and 2004.
They’ve overlooked the fact that, without GMA running, the Administration presidential candidate could be attractive even to those among the 60 to 70% that are seeking regime change. Take the case of Vice President Noli de Castro. Even though de Castro is part of the GMA regime, he manages to top the surveys.
Don’t you agree that given the Administration political machinery, plus GMA’s loyal support base - de Castro can easily garner over 30% of the votes? It would not be surprising if de Castro approximates Joseph Estrada’s 38% vote in 1998 which was considered then as a landslide victory. Under those givens, there is no need for Garci to ensure an Administration win in 2010.
At the rate the Opposition is demolishing each other, GMA’s 2010 presidential candidate can still win even if they don’t choose de Castro and opt for Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro or Independent Senator Richard Gordon (both untainted by regime scandals) on the given that GMA delivers her 25% loyal support base. With GMA’s 25% support base, either Teodoro or Gordon can easily get 30% of the votes which should be more than enough to win if there are four or more presidential candidates.
If the Opposition fails to present the ideological division that will sharpen the animosity of the 60 to 70% seeking regime change, then they’ll merely increase the odds favoring the GMA regime. It is imperative that the Opposition should spell out in clear and unmistakable terms how they are the real alternative to regime change and the attainment of a better life.
If Joseph Estrada’s plan to include staunch regime defenders Senators Juan Ponce-Enrile and Miriam D. Santiago in the Opposition Senatorial lineup happens, that will further blur the ideological divide and enhance the chances of GMA’s surrogate presidential candidate. That will be the classic case of two additions resulting in a big subtraction.
If the Opposition allows Senator Panfilo Lacson to get away with his unethical tirades against the leading Opposition presidential candidate, Senator Manny Villar, then they’ll merely erode their own chances of political victory in 2010. Villar has consistently kept close to de Castro in the surveys which is why he has become fair game.
Villar has a national party and the wherewithal to fund a well-oiled presidential campaign.
Villar is one presidential wannabe with a legitimate claim to having come from the ranks of the poor - a priceless political capital. A former Speaker of the House and Senate President, he has the stature that people seek in their presidential candidates.
You cannot destroy an Opposition asset like Villar and not enhance the GMA regime’s chances of victory.
* * *
CAS I WRECK THIS CHAIR
by William M. Esposo
from Philstar
Thursday, May 7, 2009
A BILLION NOW HUNGRY
Assembly President, citing a billion now hungry, urges ‘new politics of food’
6 April 2009 – Warning that one billion people worldwide are on the verge of starvation, the President of the United Nations General Assembly today called for “a new politics of food” emanating from the bottom up and based on the right to sustenance.
“We need to have an approach to food productihttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifon that is multi-functional, that has a concern for the poor and their right to food, a concern for the earth and its right to life, a concern for communities and their right to self-governance,” Miguel D’Escoto said, as he opened a dialogue on the topic taking place in New York.
The discussion brought together economists, agro-ecologists, human rights specialists and other experts to discuss necessary changes in the world’s agricultural production from the perspective of the right to food, as the food crisis among the world’s poorest continues, Mr. D’Escoto said.
Every six seconds a child dies of malnutrition, according to a statement issued today by the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier de Schutter, who affirmed: “The global food crisis is far from being abated.”
Mr. de Schutter, who reports to the Human Rights Council in an independent, unpaid capacity, explained that the poor will inevitably be hit by more price volatility, climate-related events and the effects of the economic crisis.
He called for a redesign of food production and trade to ensure that it serves development, the right to food and the plight of agricultural workers.
Ted Zorns Painting, "Tropical Paradise"
UN ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT URGES NEW POLITICS OF FOOD
6 April 2009 –
Warning that one billion people worldwide are on the verge of starvation, the President of the United Nations General Assembly today called for “a new politics of food” emanating from the bottom up and based on the right to sustenance.
“We need to have an approach to food production that is multi-functional, that has a concern for the poor and their right to food, a concern for the earth and its right to life, a concern for communities and their right to self-governance,” Miguel D’Escoto said, as he opened a dialogue on the topic taking place in New York.
The discussion brought together economists, agro-ecologists, human rights specialists and other experts to discuss necessary changes in the world’s agricultural production from the perspective of the right to food, as the food crisis among the world’s poorest continues, Mr. D’Escoto said.
Every six seconds a child dies of malnutrition, according to a statement issued today by the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier de Schutter, who affirmed: “The global food crisis is far from being abated.”
Mr. de Schutter, who reports to the Human Rights Council in an independent, unpaid capacity, explained that the poor will inevitably be hit by more price volatility, climate-related events and the effects of the economic crisis.
He called for a redesign of food production and trade to ensure that it serves development, the right tohttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif food and the plight of agricultural workers.
"Tropical Paradise" Painting by Ted Zorns
MASS MOVEMENT INVOLVEMENT
Citizens´ active participation in mass political movements certainly comes of age since the end of the 60´s as a visible and quite effective socio-political phenomenon.
Such mass public involvement generally starts out on the basis of individual affliction and personal motivation and evolves into collectively change public policies in a more favorable mode.
Such political mobilization tendencies represent in effect a lineal consequence of the resentment and even anger, particularly among the middle class, at the nature, direction as well as results of the policy choices made by elected decision makers.
Several socio-psychological factors, both on individual and group level, seem to account most for the frequency and intensity of middle class stakeholders´ social protest and public participation, such as consternation, frustration and anger at their inability to control those political decision making processes that touch most on their interests.
Other factors that equally influence their social protest and public participation agenda are the level of and quality of information available to afflicted citizens, their political consciousness, leadership qualities as well as their civic organizational capabilities, among other factors. ...
Culled from Abstract of ALLACADEMIC RESEARCH
"Stairway to Heaven" artprint by Jim Warren
PRG-THIRD FORCE MEETS TODAY
You are all invited.
The 3rd force will meet today, at 7pm May 7,2009 in Makati, potluck. Please share whatever relevant reading materials you have. Thank you.
Bro. Pastor Melo, convenor at gocarmelo@yahoo.com
Patrick Pantaleon, Convenor, PRG
When music becomes a refuge...
"There are two golden rules for an orchestra: start together and finish together. The public doesn't give a damn what goes on in between."
-- Sir Thomas Beech
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
