Over at DailyKos, Markos talks about Oregon's Measure 65.
He takes the unusual position that open primaries are bad (where any voter can vote in a partisan primary) but that Measure 65 (where it's a single everyone-runs primary) might be a good thing. Ultimately, he's undecided:
I've long held that if someone wants a say in a party, they should become members of that party. If they are too hip or apathetic or conflicted as to be unable to make a choice between the two dominant parties, then they should have no say in them.
But this Oregon initiative isn't trying to force the parties open. They are, instead, pitting them all against each other in an open primary, just like in Louisiana. Multiple Dems and Republicans and Greens and Libertarians and whatever else could run against each other. People could vote for the Libertarian or Green or other third party candidate in the first round confident that if they first choice lost, they'd get to make the more pragmatic call during the runoff.
In Louisiana, there is no runoff if a candidate breaks 50 percent, forcing a more pragmatic choice the first round. This ballot initiative doesn't seem to require that.
I don't know if I'm sold, and truth be told, I won't think about it again until after the elections, but this is an intriguing possibility from a state that has pioneered voting reform.
Talk to Markos over at his place. Or discuss right here.