is this how democracy is supposed to work?
 

discuss

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/05/by_mark_silva_there_are.html

This is not a classic "strategic voting" pattern, very interesting.

Yeah Todd, pretty much that is how Democracy is supposed to work. You can vote for whoever you want, and nobody asks your motivation. Why would you want to vote in the Republican primary, it is a done deal

Don't you remember Grayout Davis paying for Bill Simon to be his opponent in the gubernatorial race rather than Dick Riordan? How about when the Democratic Party has promoted this very same behavior in the past with similar motivations? This sort of stuff happens all the time.

For the lazy people who don't want to click over.
by Mark Silva

There are signs that Republican voters may be turning out in force to vote for a Democrat in Indiana's open primary elections today.

And that Democrat, for any voters following the marching orders of Rush Limbaugh looking for some havoc in the Democratic Party and a boost for the Republicans in November, could be Hillary Clinton. But then again, some of the Republicans around Indianapolis say they are voting for Barack Obama.

"Democratic ballots are popular even in southern Marion County precincts, normally Republican strongholds,'' the Indianapolis Star reports. "The turnout has prompted some nervous poll workers to call an Election Board hotline with worries about Democratic ballots running short, though none have run out yet.

Two precincts at a family center had selected Republican Jon Elrod over Democrat Andre Carson in March's special election for Congress, the Star notes. But by 9 a.m. today, just 21 voters in one of those precincts had requested Republican ballots -- out of 168 cast.

Among them was Meghan Ward-Bopp, 24, who went against family tradition and asked for Democratic ballot so she could vote for Barack Obama; she plans to vote for Republican John McCain in November.

"I'm a hardcore Republican," she said, "but it's about who I wanted in second place in case McCain doesn't make it. ... I don't like the way this country's been run in the last 20 years. I'm sick of the dynasty (of two families) that's been running things."

Jim Adams, 36, voted for Clinton "to keep the race going beyond Indiana,'' the Star reports. "He's a McCain backer and enjoys watching the Democrats fight.''


"In the end, I think McCain is going to win," Adams told the paper.

Kate Hayward left the center wearing a T-shirt: "Another Mama for Obama."

Her husband, a Republican, also voted for Obama, she said.

The Republican strongholds in the counties around Indianapolis have high demand for Democrat ballots.

"We've seen more Democrats so far in the first few hours than we'll usually see in a day," said election judge Barb Stauch at Avon United Methodist Church in Hendricks County.

"We've had a lot of questions about switching. People want to know if they can switch back and forth, if they can vote Democratic this time," said election clerk Cara Paasch at the church.

Democract Liisa Le, 45, voted at the church this morning. She said she was most interested in the presidential primary and the Avon School Board race.

"The issues facing this country are huge. The economy, the problems with gas, the problems with real estate, the problems with food prices ... must I go on?" said Le, a stay-at-home mother.

With thanks to Jon Murray and Rebecca Neal of the Indy Star

Looks to me like the normal consequences of the gang warfare into which politics has degenerated. We even have gang colors now.

Put "None of the Above" on every ballot - the career politicians need some feedback.

Plenty of Dems voted for McCain in the 2000 primaries just to hurt Bush. I saw it with my own eyes in VA.

This Bush looked okay before we all got a whiff of it.:D

If each party allowed ANYONE to vote in their primaries (its different in each state) then this would be a non-issue.

The question is "Is it fair to stack the deck in your favor at the voting booth."

If each party allowed ANYONE to vote in their primaries (its different in each state) then this would be a non-issue.

The question is "Is it fair to stack the deck in your favor at the voting booth."

Edit - I don't know how the double post happened....

I am not sure I understand the problem: People are interested and involved in an election cycle. This is a problem exactly how:cool:

They're not voting for the right person? :)

In CA you are not allowed to vote in the "other" parties primary election. So if you're registered as a democrat, you can't vote for McCain in the primary and vice versa. The idea of casting your vote in a primary the way these people are doing just feels odd to me.

At any rate, all states should have the same rules along these lines. And in fact I think all states should have their primaries on the same day. This dragging things out is ridiculous and expensive.

States rights are a beotch...I like it that way:)

well then we should get rid of DC entirely...would likely work a lot better :p

Ba$tard!:mad:

feh, just walk to VA ;)

I think it would...roll it back to the federal responsibilities outlined in the Big C and I'm in.

Of course I'm involved in the whole "common defense" theme:cool:

That's too far for an old geezer. Besides, I might run into a coyote along the way. :p

Political Parties have nothing to do with the Government. Granted each Political party should adopt rules that are uniform from state to state. But that is their business as to how they want to choose their candidates to run for office.

In an open primary in CA, I voted for a conservative Dem over the liberal Dem, instead of for the Republican candidate. The Republican candidate was a given and the Dem I voted for was pro spoon so it was a win win situation for me.

As the election turned out the Conservative Dem won the seat in Congress. This too was a win, as he became the incumbent and that seat would not be challenged by a liberal Dem in the future.

Better said than I...there are no issues with states rights in an essentially private political party affair.

RadioTabs is prescient.

Edit: BTW, for those who think term limits is impossible, the Twenty-second Amendment (Amendment XXII) of the United States Constitution set a term limit for the President of the United States. The United States Congress passed the amendment on March 21, 1947. It was ratified by the requisite number of states on February 27, 1951.

We can do this.