The current Gallop Poll indicates 44% of voters are Independent.
John's background is part of the view from my home office windows. It is the Chrysler building.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us 
Showing posts with label John Avlon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Avlon. Show all posts
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Independent Voters and 2012 Election
On September 16, 2011 C-SPAN's Washington Journal John Avlon talked about the role of independent voters in the 2012 elections. Topics included voter attitudes on issues, the two political parties and Washington politics in general, and the viability of an independent political movement. He also responded to telephone calls and electronic communications.
The current Gallop Poll indicates 44% of voters are Independent.
John's background is part of the view from my home office windows. It is the Chrysler building.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us
The current Gallop Poll indicates 44% of voters are Independent.
John's background is part of the view from my home office windows. It is the Chrysler building.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us
Monday, July 25, 2011
Independent voters pin blame in debt gridlock
CBS News, July 23, 2011. Time is running out to raise the debt ceiling before the U.S. begins to default on its obligations, a deal appears to be nowhere in sight, and Democrats and Republicans only seem to be getting angrier at each other.
So, who's to blame for the debt lid gridlock in Washington?
"The Early Show on Saturday Morning" put together a panel of independent voters to address the question.
They were joined by two analysts of different political stripes who happen to be husband and wife: Margaret Hoover, who was an aide to President George W. Bush and is the author of "American Individualism: How a New Generation of Conservatives Can Save the Republican Party," and John Avlon, the senior political columnist for Newsweek and The Daily Beast.
Suffice is to say, the voters spread the blame around.
Some of the independent members belong to the New York City Independent Party Organizations.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us
So, who's to blame for the debt lid gridlock in Washington?
"The Early Show on Saturday Morning" put together a panel of independent voters to address the question.
They were joined by two analysts of different political stripes who happen to be husband and wife: Margaret Hoover, who was an aide to President George W. Bush and is the author of "American Individualism: How a New Generation of Conservatives Can Save the Republican Party," and John Avlon, the senior political columnist for Newsweek and The Daily Beast.
Suffice is to say, the voters spread the blame around.
Some of the independent members belong to the New York City Independent Party Organizations.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Open Primaries / Open Ballots Playbook
Since returning from the National Conference of Independents and posting about it, I have been thinking about the question of Open Primaries and Open Ballots. If you have been reading this blog, you have read how I looked at opening the primaries and ballot access. But after the conference, I realized that the audience of independent activist have many different opinions on what the idea means and how it is looked at in their states.
The morning panel:
Panel Discussion
Moderated by Jackie Salit and IndependentVoting.org General Counsel, Harry Kresky with:
•John Avlon, Senior Political Consultant, TheDailyBeast.com; Founder, No Labels
•Theresa Amato, Ralph Nader’s Presidential Campaign Manager in 2004
•James Mangia, Executive Director, St. John's Well Child & Family Center and Founding Secretary, National Reform Party
•Bradley Tusk, Founder, Tusk Strategies; Campaign Manager Bloomberg 2009
•Lenora Fulani, Co-founder, IndependentVoting.org
•Michael Hardy, General Counsel, National Action Network
•Cathy Stewart, Chair, New York County Independence Party
•Douglas Schoen, pollster and author
Use this link to view the panel discussion.
Before I can decide on how things could work, I need to define what they should fix in our current political process. These panelist's thoughts helped me to begin this process:
As I have been blogging this issue, I have said that it is time for all voters to take part in the political process and should be able to select candidates and not parties. So the concept of opening a party's primary forces the voter to only select candidates pre-selected by the party and fails the ability for the voter to pick any candidates those choose for each position on the ballot . Then there is the issue of denying potential candidates the opportunity to get on the ballot.
The ballot issue should be easy to address by designing a process that is even and fair to all protential candidates: filing fee, equal number of petition signatures, write-ins, and the parties paying for their selection process. Write-ins are a little harder to decide. They are part of any primary system, but should they also be part of the General Election with the type of primary I am looking at? Of course what ever primary system we pick must take into account prior Supreme Court decisions.
Now we have the General Election. I have been looking at CA's Top Two but now I am not sure. Since most voters in our current system may not take part in the primary and only vote in the General. So I disagree with the concept of some % value that will negates a candidate from going to a general election. I will continue this General Election problem in future posts.
To create a system to answer all the Supreme Court issues, I would create a system with these features:
1. All Candidates selected by their parties paid for system, ballot accepted new and existing minor party candidates, independents, and write-ins are on one ballot.
2. There is two boxes. One optionally indicates the Candidates registered party. The other optionally indicates all endorsements.
3. General Election - TBD
A possible additional element in the primary could be IRV. This would allow the first selection of a favorite son or daughter, vanity candidate, etc.
What do you think is a way to Break the Two-Party Monopoly?
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us
The morning panel:
Panel Discussion
Moderated by Jackie Salit and IndependentVoting.org General Counsel, Harry Kresky with:
•John Avlon, Senior Political Consultant, TheDailyBeast.com; Founder, No Labels
•Theresa Amato, Ralph Nader’s Presidential Campaign Manager in 2004
•James Mangia, Executive Director, St. John's Well Child & Family Center and Founding Secretary, National Reform Party
•Bradley Tusk, Founder, Tusk Strategies; Campaign Manager Bloomberg 2009
•Lenora Fulani, Co-founder, IndependentVoting.org
•Michael Hardy, General Counsel, National Action Network
•Cathy Stewart, Chair, New York County Independence Party
•Douglas Schoen, pollster and author
Use this link to view the panel discussion.
Before I can decide on how things could work, I need to define what they should fix in our current political process. These panelist's thoughts helped me to begin this process:
 |  |  |
As I have been blogging this issue, I have said that it is time for all voters to take part in the political process and should be able to select candidates and not parties. So the concept of opening a party's primary forces the voter to only select candidates pre-selected by the party and fails the ability for the voter to pick any candidates those choose for each position on the ballot . Then there is the issue of denying potential candidates the opportunity to get on the ballot.
The ballot issue should be easy to address by designing a process that is even and fair to all protential candidates: filing fee, equal number of petition signatures, write-ins, and the parties paying for their selection process. Write-ins are a little harder to decide. They are part of any primary system, but should they also be part of the General Election with the type of primary I am looking at? Of course what ever primary system we pick must take into account prior Supreme Court decisions.
Now we have the General Election. I have been looking at CA's Top Two but now I am not sure. Since most voters in our current system may not take part in the primary and only vote in the General. So I disagree with the concept of some % value that will negates a candidate from going to a general election. I will continue this General Election problem in future posts.
To create a system to answer all the Supreme Court issues, I would create a system with these features:
1. All Candidates selected by their parties paid for system, ballot accepted new and existing minor party candidates, independents, and write-ins are on one ballot.
2. There is two boxes. One optionally indicates the Candidates registered party. The other optionally indicates all endorsements.
3. General Election - TBD
A possible additional element in the primary could be IRV. This would allow the first selection of a favorite son or daughter, vanity candidate, etc.
What do you think is a way to Break the Two-Party Monopoly?
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe Is Hijacking America
I watched an interview with the auther, The Daily Beast’s John Avlon, on NY1 last night. I will now read it as I agree with his thoughts on most voters do not what parties.
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us 
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
