Friday, January 25, 2008

Democrats for Romney?

I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do plan to return to them soon.

Then, I plan to answer the response about Iraq. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.

How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?

Stop the
Murder of

“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)

“Democrats for Romney?
By Doug Ibendahl
For Family Taxpayers Network

The ultra-leftwing Daily Kos is encouraging fellow liberal Democrats to meddle in today’s Michigan Primary by voting for Mitt Romney on the Republican side.

In a call-to-action entitled ‘Let’s have some fun in Michigan’ the popular national blog for Democrats explains its logic: ‘Michigan Democrats should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win. And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan.’ We’ll soon know how many Democrats answer the open invitation for mischief. It could be a significant number, especially since the Michigan Presidential Primary on the Democratic side is truly a bust.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has stripped Michigan of its Democratic delegates as punishment for moving the state’s primary ahead too early, and without consent. Both John Edwards and Barack Obama took their names off the Michigan ballot long ago. On the Democratic side, only Hillary Clinton has devoted any material time and resources to Michigan.

The attempt to make the state a player on the national scene with an early primary has become a huge embarrassing disaster for the Michigan Democratic Party. (It’s somewhat less so on the GOP side. The national Republicans are taking away only half of the state’s Republican delegates as punishment for breaking the scheduling rules.)

So today’s primary for the Democrats is already a joke. Hillary’s ‘win’ will essentially be meaningless, unless national Democratic leaders decide to commute the punishment by letting the delegates count by convention time (and that’s if Hillary even remains in the race by then).

Edwards and Obama supporters can still go anti-Hillary today by casting a vote for ‘uncommitted.’ But many may feel it’s not worth trudging out into the cold and snow just for that option.

So the Republican Primary today looks wide open to mischief by Democrat crossovers.

That’s a shame. Unfortunately, the Republicans hardly have clean hands on this score. And of course the Daily Kos is promoting the idea of crossing over as payback.

The lefties point to at least three cases in Michigan, beginning in 1972, where Republicans encouraged their own crossovers in an effort to help nominate the weakest Democrat on the ballot.

The Democrats may be giving the Republicans too much credit/blame for their past activities. It’s hard to say.

But it is pretty clear that the basic charge of past Republican mischief is very valid. In fact just last night on MSNBC’s Tucker show, legendary Republican political consultant Roger Stone basically boasted about being hired for just such a crossover-voter drive years ago in Michigan.

So discussions about which side is sleazier on this score are basically a waste of time. Neither party comes to the table with clean hands.

Instead, there is something much more important for all Republicans to think about. Do we even want the candidate the Democrats are trying to prop-up?

Personally, I say no. In fact if you’ve watched the recent debates, it’s pretty obvious that the person the Democrats want to keep the most is the same man all the other GOP candidates like the least.

That kind of inverse relationship probably shouldn’t be surprising. It should tell us something.

As Romney’s moved his campaign from state to state he’s used his personal fortune to fund a brutal air war attacking his closest competitors. Granted, that’s hardly a big deal all by itself.

The problem is Romney can typically be found attacking his opponents for something he himself did as Governor of Massachusetts. That seems to be what’s really gotten under the skin of some of the others.

Some of the other candidates may mix it up from time to time. But it’s easy to see they’re all pretty much united in being sick and tired of Mitt. There’s some indication that the Republican electorate has started feeling the same way.

Romney is starting to look like the Eddie Haskell of this race. It’s no wonder a GOP-hating site like the Daily Kos is playing shady games and trying to force us to keep Mitt around.

Posted January 15, 2008”

This was posted the same day as the Michigan primary and I didn’t read it until after the primary. The possibility and sometimes the probability that members of one party will cross over to another party’s primary and vote for the weaker candidates is one reason why I don’t like open primaries. An open primary lets an individual change from party to party at any primary election. A closed primary requires a voter to miss one primary election before he can vote for a different party. Thus, voters are less likely to change parties.

I know that people switch from one party to another to nominate candidates because I did it in Arizona which has an open primary system. I did it because the Democratic Party was not running any candidates for some offices in the primary and I wanted some small voice in selecting the officeholder for those uncontested positions. (Both parties should do a better job of filling nomination positions so that there are no uncontested offices.)

I don’t know if Democrats voted for Romney in Michigan because of this encouragement although my guess is that some did. I don’t know if that made the difference between his winning and losing the primary but it may have. Allowing such switching defeats the purpose of a PARTY primary since, if outsiders are allowed to vote, it is not really the party faithful who are selected the party’s candidates. It is no longer a party’s primary; it is a voters’ primary.

The supporters of the Democratic Party should be the ones to nominate the candidates for the Democratic Party for the general election. The supporters of the Republican Party should be the ones to nominate the candidate for the Republican Party for the general election. The same is true for all other parties. That is the purpose of a political party primary.


Post a Comment

<< Home