" That Presidential Primaries are contrary to democratic values"

"Presidential primaries are undemocratic because they force people into a very narrow scope of candidates. Let's say the primary winners are two people who I don't like at all; now I am forced to vote for someone who I don't support, or not vote at all. I'm not picking my government; and if a candidate wins by a small percentage, that means a lot of people aren't getting their government. Of course not everyone can be happy; eventually only one person will win. But primaries force people to pick early. The popularity of a candidate swings, and it's unfair to kick someone out early just because there's someone ahead of them months before the actual election. In this election especially, I could still see either Clinton or Obama, either McCain or Romney, winning in November. Why can't I vote for the candidate I like", you are not forced, because you voted, it does not force you to vote. "Party rules within primaries are also undemocratic. In my state (New York), and many others, people can only vote if they are registered either Democrat or Republican. This means that independents like me can't vote in the primaries, so we can't actually have a say. This constricts people to picking out of two political parties, even in other states since voters must vote within their parties.", The reason they have that is because Republicans are choosing a Republican and a democrat is picking a democrat. If it was just open then, it would be democrats voting for a republican, they would be voting to mess with a election, this arguement carries no weight. "Essentially, primaries force voters to pick from pre-packaged political deals, and aren't given their actual say." Resolved: The US system of presidential primaries is contrary to democratic values. U.S.-United States of America Presidential Primaries-Of or relating to a president or presidency, A preliminary election in which the registered voters of a political party nominate candidates for office. Contrary-Opposed, as in character or purpose: Democratic-Of, characterized by, or advocating democracy: Values: System of core beliefs. Observations 1-The primaries we will be debating are the ones of today in the 21st century or the present. Overview: What is a presidential primary is a question to a presidential primary? Both major political parties (Democratic and Republican) officially nominate their candidate for President at their respective national conventions, usually held during the summer before the election. Depending on state law and state party rules, when voters cast ballots for a candidate in a presidential caucus or primary, they may actually be voting to award delegates "bound" to vote for a candidate at the state or national convention, or they may simply be expressing an opinion that the state party is not bound to follow in selecting delegates to the national convention. In addition to delegates chosen during primaries and caucuses, state delegations to both the (Democratic and Republican) conventions also include "unpledged" delegates. For Republicans, these include top party officials. Democrats have a more expansive group of unpledged delegates called "super delegates", who are party leaders and elected officials. Con. 1 Primaries work for everyone To spend four months criss-crossing the country meeting voters is a good test of a candidate's strengths and weaknesses, and it gives Americans lots of opportunities to decide which politician they like best. Also, a little-known candidate who does well in the early caucuses or primaries has a chance to attract financial support, and organize a strong campaign. Since the first primaries are smaller states, the way the process works is simple, go from small to big states. This gives every candidate a chance to show its side and gain momentum and voters getting to know them. Presidential primaries are the best for a representative democracy. Con. 2 before primaries Before primaries, presidential nominees, were picked by the convention, by themselves, meaning the people really, did not have a say on how will be the nominee. This is not a great democratic value, primaries give the candidates a chance to battle it out for the seat, rather than just be nominated. This is the best way for everyone's voice to be heard, for the people. Primaries work because it gives the people a voice to be heard in the system. By the people having a voice, it really is giving a voice to who will be picked, thus it is an important part of democratic values. Con.3 Front Loading is good For all the fretting we heard this past year over the dangers of front-loading the process -- that it would give a leg up to the wealthier, well-known candidates, preventing the slow ascent of sleeper candidates -- well, so far that's just dead wrong. Mitt Romney's millions didn't win him the gold in either of the first few contests -- instead we saw a relative unknown with little funding win Iowa, and a veteran candidate whose political tombstone was all but written this past summer, take New Hampshire. Maybe we weren't giving enough credit to the voters -- who so far have rejected the perceived momentum of the winning candidate coming out of Iowa and now New Hampshire. Now it's looking like this race may go beyond Super Duper Tuesday, and we're even hearing whispers of the forgotten words, "brokered convention" -- something this country hasn't seen since the 1952! This means that at the end, there may not be a winner, which is good, because it proves even though front loading has critics, it is causing a close race on both sides, and doesn't allow the media to proclaim a front runner and thus is good for every candidate. http://www.cnn.com...