South Carolina Newspaper Says Parties Should Pay for their Own Primaries

The Herald-Journal of Spartanburg, South Carolina, has this April 23 editorial, advocating that political parties ought to pay for their own primaries.

The editorial is factually misinformed when it suggests that the Communist Party and the National Socialist Party are ballot-qualified parties in South Carolina. Neither party has ever been on the ballot in South Carolina. Even before 1950, when all ballots in that state were printed privately, the Communist Party never had the organization in South Carolina to run candidates and print and distribute its own ballots, not even for presidential elector.


Comments

South Carolina Newspaper Says Parties Should Pay for their Own Primaries — No Comments

  1. Some in SC want to punish the parties by making them pay the costs of primaries. This is a typical idea for getting revenge on the evil political parties. The anger here is over the Greenville County GOP’s suit against the open primary law (Harms v. Hudgens).

    SC parties also have the option of nominating by convention, which requires the approval of 75% of the convention delegates. Harms also challenges the 75% rule.

    Most municipal elections in SC are nonpartisan. Greenville County’s are not, however, and the GOP pays for municipal primaries there. In the Harms suit, the GOP says it’s willing to also pay for primaries for county offices.

    If the parties were forced to pay for all primaries, there would be far fewer primaries, which would cause an outcry from the voters.

  2. Why ballot access? We can not trust Democans and Republicrats to broadcast the corruption of pro establishment shill[s]. It is the Dems and the GOP whom have run the bus off into a ditch. And perverted personal corruption of hit men, not a word from the ‘Majors’!

    “The Wade Sanders [John Kerry, San Diego, California Lt Governor] known to Citizens For a Better Veterans Home is a self absorbed career sycophant whom tramples over abused veterans with out a second thought! We have been warning folks about the lack of ethics in this shallow shell of a man! Now comes the kiddie porn confessions. We told ya so………..

    Founded in May 1998
    263 Eucalyptus Court
    Chula Vista CAlifornia
    91910-3030

    donlake@ymail.com

    619.420.209 “

  3. Ol’ Steve Rankin is full of fertilizer, again.
    Every REAL American, every genuine Patriot knows there is absolutely no reason at all that the poor downtrodden taxpayers should have to foot the bill for primaries, which are, after all, activities by private organizations.
    Let parties return to conventions for picking their candidates, and let those parties themselves pay for the conventions.
    Woe betide everyone who wants to further burden the taxpayers.

  4. In fact, the Communist Party USA does not even have a chapter in South Carolina.

    Primaries should not be required or funded. A simple (and small) filing fee should be the only requirement for getting on the ballot.

  5. I think that maybe the editorial writer was engaging in a bit of hyperbole. Is South Carolina one of those crazy States that don’t let the Communists organize?

    South Carolina should have non-partisan primaries as used in Washington and Louisiana, and have been proposed by the legislature in California. They should take it a step further and use if for presidential elections as well.

  6. “Non-partisan primaries” rather defeats the purpose of primaries, which is to choose a *nominee* — a nominee of the private organization known as a “political party” — to run against the nominee or nominees of other parties.
    Perhaps if we could just eliminate the whole odious concept of political parties, a non-partisan primary might be feasible, but then what would we be doing?
    We wouldn’t be having party candidates running against other party candidates, so what would we have?
    Then perhaps a top two or three or four could run in the general election.
    But, then, IF Jim Riley’s aunt had wheels, she’d be his wagon.

  7. Groups of private individuals are free to associate in support of a candidate for public office. What does it whether they call themselves a group, party, caucus, gang, council, or some other name; and whether they call the candidate they support a nominee, superhero, captain, or comrade?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.