The benefits of participating in the primary is getting to participate in the convention as a delegate. Getting to put your ideas forward about the party platform. I'm doing everything I can to ensure a Democrat in the White House.
I'm not registered as a Democrat or Republican and I plan to be in Yunan province on February 5th where primaries really don't matter, but I though Colorado (at least the Democrats therein) holds caucuses on super-duper-über Tuesday. It is therefore extremely unlikely that you will vote in a primary.
That reminds me that i need to write to my state reps in Richmond, as they're considering implementing party registration here in Virginia, which i oppose heartily. Our non-partisan registration has served us well, and seeing as almost half of all elected offices in the commonwealth are non-partisan, really, what's the point of party registration.
I was wondering that, too.
He's training a mixture model. Those are the densities of the two normals in the mixture.
And your allowed to make such decision, and enjoy your freedom to do so here in the wonderful U.S.A.. We Love you and your hubby's regardless. Trust me Chris and I are not seeing eye to eye on the candidates this year at all. We more or less chuckle and tease each other about it because you are absolutely right their will be one blue, and one red on top of the lists, and whomever that blue candidate is, it will be the one I am voting for.
California manages to stick at least one proposition in each primary, and since they moved the date up we get two primary elections this year.
Did I mention the state is broke?
But primary voting isn't just a stepping stone to voting in the final election. Those votes do trade power among the delegates, as someone's already said. They raise voter turnout which makes more demands on the candidates. What you're calling "noise" is what I would call "representation," and although I totally understand your fears of pushing someone unelectable onto the ticket, no one knows how to solve that problem. No one knows whether Obama or Clinton or Edwards is more likely to win, and I don't see anyone else getting the nomination.
The way I think about it is this. When voter turnout is very low, candidates (and current elected officials!) can buy votes cheaply, with small concessions to the loudest people. When the party base is broad, diverse, and active, it demands a more nuanced and thoughtful position.
Clearly, what you should do is register as a Republican and vote for the candidate you like least in their primary.
Or think is least electable. I think I'd vote for Huckabee except that I have all of these fears of reaping what I sowed.
We could get you a "Blame me! I voted for Huckabee." bumper sticker.
I have always said that this is a very bad tactic,because the candidate in the opposing party may well get elected, and then you're stuck with the guilt of having helped them into office. (California's primary is no longer fully open, but you can ask for any party's ballot at the front desk, so you can actually vote for a party you are not registered for.)
Well, I agree with you that, by getting involved in this way, you become more actively responsible for the result than if you just sit back and stay out of it. Whether this is a good reason to avoid doing it or not is a whole different question.
That said, I wasn't actually serious. I also think that it's a bad tactic, but for a different reason: it corrupts the democratic process, which I tend to find some value in.