ABOUT ELECTIONS

The two party system, Democrat or Republican, works well when it comes to County, State, and National levels of government. However, it is superfluous at the local level where the impact of conservatism or liberalism is not the issue among candidates. At this level the question is based on local interests.

The  In a community where there is an overwhelming registration favoriting one party and in which that party is dominated by a strong party" boss " in a primary race done party affiliation can be a force. (just noticed  3:25pm the errors which I will blame on Dragon's self importance)

In some such communities as Plainfield the situation is unique;  Here there is an organized opposition faction within the party itself. Here for local elections the primary election fulfills the function of the two-party system. The general election is superfluous since there is no electorate sufficiently divided to create a meaningful vote at that time.

In communities where nonpartisan election for local office is the rule the success rate has been questionable. Instead of individual candidates standing on their own merits there has been a tendency to form local power groups therefore defeating that concept. Years ago Hillside tried nonpartisan elections which proved to be a failure.

There is a good local example in  the Board of Education elections which are supposed to be apolitical but tend to be a contest between various power slates all professing no political affiliation. When the electorate turnout is less than 15% a small well organized faction can impose their specific agenda upon the majority. That can happen when the same formula is used for municipal office elections.