Virginia’s primaries are open to all voters, or at least that was the idea. Open primaries mean that anyone can vote in either primary, regardless of their own party affiliation. It is the corner stone of democracy, giving each individual the right to vote for the person they want to see elected to the position. However, this policy has Virginia Republicans worried that their primary will be raided by Democrats voting for the underdog candidates to skew primary results. In an effort to protect their primary results the party has submitted a request to the State Board of Elections to require anyone applying to vote in the primary ballot to first promise in writing they will vote for whoever the Republican nominee is in next fall’s election.
In the science of persuasion the theory usually goes that consistency is a strong indicator of action. It is important to individuals to be, or at least appear to be, consistent in what they say and do. Therefore, Virginia GOP are betting that those willing to promise in writing their loyalty to the party will actually have an invest interest in their primary election and the party’s success next year. What they are failing to consider is those embolden enough to attempt to foil the primary results likely will not think twice about voting for their own candidate of preference next November, regardless of an oath they signed. And they could be alienating those whose loyalties aren’t necessary to the party first. Why would someone supporting Ron Paul because of his Libertarian ideals want to promise to vote for the Republican candidate if Paul decides to run as an Independent? Wouldn’t that individual’s loyalty be more with Paul as an Independent? What is the party offing them to vote for the Republican candidate instead of their preferred candidate?
Though I understand the rationale behind the request, presenting a united party front and garnering support for the party, I feel that the message they are sending is not an effective party tactic. Those who will truly place value in the oath most likely don’t need to make it. They are already loyal to the party. For those whose loyalties aren’t with the GOP likely won’t take the oath seriously.
The request has been approved and there is no practical way to enforce it. Instead of presenting a united Republican Party, in my opinion, the message comes off hypocritical. If the point of the oath is to rally the party behind any Republican nominee for president, why should it matter who votes for who in the primary? The point is a Republican will be nominated and that is the person the party should stand behind. The only way outsiders can come in and mess with primary results if Virginia GOP already have a choice candidate they want to support which goes against the very message they are trying to send.
1 comment:
The pledge does seem sort of hokey. I think it's a poor way to confront a very real problem. The open primary format means that people don't have to feel any sort of attachment to a party in order to participate in the nomination process.
Many political analysts think that this format allowed John McCain to take the New Hampshire primary in 2000. Since the compelling race was on the Republican side, a great number of independents chose to vote in the Republican primary.
The smoke-filled rooms of yesteryear weren't a good way to choose a presidential candidate but a political party's nominating process should be primarily determined by those who are loyal to that party.
Personally, I like the way Florida and many other states conduct their primary. When you register to vote you select a party. You can change your mind and switch parties, but if you register as an independent you have to sit out the primary.
Post a Comment