[Pnp-wg] More issues relating to "proportionality".

[Greg Gerritt]

RI primaries have a slot for uncommitted and in the RI primary there wsa a
significant vote for uncommitted in 2004, which we reflected with our
delegation to the convention.  greg

> From: "Thomas Leavitt" <thomasleavitt@hotmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:16:35 -0700
> To: pnp-wg@lists.gp-us.org
> Subject: [Pnp-wg] More issues relating to "proportionality".
> 
> I was thinking about the issue of how a state would determine the sympathies
> of Greens at a grassroots level, and the following occured to me:
> 
> In states where primary elections are held, does the Green Party have the
> option (legally) of putting "uncommitted" or "NOTA" on the ballot? I know in
> California, that we can't do NOTA, and I'm pretty sure we can't do
> "uncommitted" either. States that don't do government administered primaries
> or that use caucuses would not run into this problem. The result would tend
> to skew the results against folks who prefer "uncommitted" and NOTA
> positions - what if these positions pulled 25-33% of the vote in all other
> states but those with state-administered primary elections? The result could
> hardly be called democratic? Should we encourage states with this type of
> primary to poll their members, and adjust the resulting figures from their
> primary elections?
> 
> 
> --
> Thomas Leavitt -- thomasleavitt@hotmail.com, Sr. Systems Admin For Hire
> Resume at http://www.thomasleavitt.org/personal/resume/
> 
> Wired since 1981. Internet-enabled since 1990. Web-enabled since 1993.
> Older, wiser, and poorer, post-crash. :)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pnp-wg mailing list
> Pnp-wg@lists.gp-us.org
> http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/pnp-wg