Nope. At least for the major political parties there’s no mandatory fee for registering as a member of a party when you register to vote. (You can also choose “no party affiliation” when registering to vote) It’s hard enough for parties to attract members even when it’s free. Obviously once they know you’re a supporter they’ll ask for donations frequently though.
1 Like
It doesn’t, but since there is two-party hegemony, one party will always have a majority (or a third party will caucus with them, giving them a majority). This way, even if another party controls one branch of government, they can still control the legislative agenda. This is why I said that, effectively, the states are the parties.
More to the point, it’s like Tories taking control and tipping the scales in regional elections in a way that they can ensure that they always win. It’s also worth noting that the states don’t dictate how a party runs their elections per se, but they do control the execution of the election, therefore the majority party can control the outcome. See: Wisconsin today.
There should be. Never underestimate complacency and the power of propaganda.
Don’t worry. You’re not missing something here. It’s broken and has never worked. The GOP doesn’t represent the will of the vast majority of citizens, but the whole system is weighted in their favor, so they can dictate enough rules in enough places to remain in power.
2 Likes
Nope. You “identify” as a member of a particular party when you register to vote. There are requirements to work for a party or act as a candidate for that party. But they’re more along the lines of public signatures and fundraising requirements.
In effect the parties don’t have control over their membership, just their apparatus/leadership and internal rules. The national organizations are not even technically in charge of the individual, seperate state organizations. Not directly.
Party dues/fees would be a no go in the current system. Since they’d act as a poll tax excluding people via a fee from primary elections. Which are for the most part these days, official public elections. And that’s part and parcel of why we took control of primaries away from the parties. The old insular caucus system, which had no public involvement even from registered members. Bred a shit ton of corruption and disenfranchised a lot of people.
1 Like
The election is not just for the Primary. Here in Milwaukee the mayoral election is taking place, as well as positions for treasurer, comptroller, and county executive. There is also a state supreme court judge position on the ballot, as well as initiatives for redistricting (aka gerrymandering), school funding, and Marsy’s Law.
Personally, I tried (twice!) to get my absentee ballot, but it never arrived. Right now the only option is to vote in person. Poll staff shortages have reduced the number of polling places from >150 to 5. Wait times are expected to be more than 5 hours. This may be the first time I haven’t voted in 35 years.
8 Likes
Judicial Crisis Network is an arm of the Federalist Society.
3 Likes
The party primaries need to use the State election apparatus to get a democratic vote accomplished. That includes not only the physical apparatus, but also the voter rolls.
1 Like
Do you need 270 by law? I’m thinking of 1864 here, when the Southern states didn’t nominate electors.
From what I can find, the 12th Amendment only requires a majority of the electors chosen to vote for someone. If there are fewer than 538 electors for some reason, doesn’t that mean a majority is less than 270?
1 Like
Quite unlike the system that replaced it, it seems! 
/s
Aha! This explains much more. Thanks. Coupled with no real membership as per @Ryuthrowsstuff’s response, it starts to make sense.
Fancy having political parties with no real membership, independent infrastructure or apparatus for organising other than those provided by the state. What are you guys, some sort of communists? /s
4 Likes
As far as I’m aware it’s a majority of all electors in the pool. The number of electors is set by the constitution, and the language there is that the states “shall” select. Not can or have the right to. So constitutionally they have to, and the number is fixed to their congressional delagation.
The constitution also calls for an absolute majority, currently 270. All of that is fixed constitutionally and there’s no real way around it. Nothing calls for a vote, and there’s nothing about how electors are selected or apportionment. But there must be x number of electors selected on election day.
If you want to see some shit read up on American party politics before the 50’s. Murders, trafficked women, seats straight up bought and sold. Complete idiots all over. Vice presidents who peaced out to run bars in western territories.
And the Teapot Dome Scandal, which sounds fairly simple on it’s face. But spins out into a betting scandal that nearly killed the predecessor to Major League Baseball, multiple killings, presidential illegitimate children and child brides. And at least one serial killer.
Plus black people and women can practically run for office now. Which is nice.
That is certainly part of it. A lot of our government system has been structured to exclude parties from direct control and formal roles. So what role they have is usually by proxy.
The other end of the elections is a sort of soft pressure to force them to use the public election system.
The big bit being ballot access and public election funding. Cause we do have public election funding, it’s not terribly important for the big national offices. But it’s absolutely critical for down ballot races.
Anyone can get listed on the ballot with enough signatures and paying the filing fee. But your party being listed in it’s own collum and access to public funding is based on support level for your candidates in previous elections. Varies by state but federally 3% of votes is the cutoff. And often you have to be on the primary ballot to get on the general ballot.
If your party and candidates are not listed on the ballot come election time. You won’t get votes, and won’t win. Or you risk being excluded from funding or not having a party presence on the ballot. Which will fuck you. Especially in state and local offices.
So carrot and the stick. There are benefits to participating, but also consequences for not doing so. All intended to make the parties work within a fairly administered process, with broader public access.
In theory.
4 Likes
Mostly sounds like a decent system except for the “go online” part. How is the system secured against hackers and others who would try to interfere or disrupt it?
5 Likes
Oh, it’s secure. They said so.
From previous Labour leader elections…
Damn.
The many responses to your straightforward question which completely missed the point have been an hilarious example of two people seperated by a common tongue 
3 Likes
(Onion is getting dark these days.)
8 Likes
There’s more on the ballot than just the primary. One MAJOR thing is a WI Supreme Court seat up for re-election. There’s also tons of other things varying by county.
2 Likes
Mark my words: I about two weeks, we’re going to have a big spike in covid cases here in WI.
I’m going to brave the polls. Small town, so hopefully things won’t be so bad as it is in, like, Milwaukee (or other larger cities)
I’m kinda wishing I had a full bio-hazzard suit. Joking but not really. 
4 Likes
Liked. But in all seriousness, and genuinely with no disrespect to any who did respond, it is perhaps the case that the immediate judicial and legislative fuckwittery and its effect is very much uppermost in everyone’s mind (and perhaps also that the whys and wherefores are so hidden in the mists of time, and the status quo is so taken for granted, that the asking of the question ‘does not compute’ because most people cannot remember it ever having been any different - ‘it just is’)
1 Like
What, you didn’t get your standard-issue voting PPE?
Oh, that’s apparently only for the fuckers that forced you to go vote in-person in the first place.
3 Likes
