Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(California) State GOP may restrict primary to party members

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Newsjock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-22-09 11:14 PM
Original message
(California) State GOP may restrict primary to party members
Source: San Francisco Chronicle

California Republican Party leaders, in a move that could reshape state primary-election politics, are preparing a move to bar decline-to-state voters - now 20 percent of the electorate - from casting a GOP ballot in statewide and legislative primaries.

The proposed bylaw to the state Republican platform, which delegates will decide at the party convention next month in Indian Wells (Riverside County), has riled some business leaders and Republicans.

They say it could be disastrous for the party's future and could relegate Republicans in the state to "permanent minority" status by keeping independent voters from supporting Republicans in primary elections.

... The GOP plan allows conservative party insiders to shape critical 2010 races, said strategist Patrick Dorinson. "They want to pull up the ladder to the tree house where they play," he said. "They're treating the GOP like it's a club where they all make the rules for everyone, and the signs says, 'No girls allowed and no Latinos.' "

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/0...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-22-09 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. I say, let'em.
I'll even send them some nails just in case they don't have enough to nail down that coffin lid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
23. It won't stop people from changing registration and voting in the GOP primary
It really won't make any difference at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #23
34. Eh, it probably will reduce the number of DTS voters in their primary.
What's best though is the way the party is fracturing so badly even while Arnold is in Sacto.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
37. alaska did that. they will regret it. trust me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-22-09 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. What the hell are they thinking? After you swear your allegiance, do you have to vote in blood?
Edited on Sat Aug-22-09 11:30 PM by Skip Intro

Political suicide or the start of something scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-22-09 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
3. and they should allow only gun-owning white evangelical fundamenatlists, too
Make the party as exclusive as possible. Get in touch with its roots.


Let it die.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
36. They are signaling it by the venue choice
Indian Wells? Indian Wells????? Tennis courts & golf courses - all the staff to keep the places in operation live in Indio!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chwaliszewski Donating Member (17 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-22-09 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. Unbelievable...
maybe the other states will follow suit. Show us how isolationism works, you corn-skinners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandySF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
5. Good news for us
The CA Republican Party is batshit crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DallasNE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. The Move Will Just Further Alienate Voters
And drive more away from the Republican Party. I say, let them have their way on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #6
22. It's their primary so they make up the rules
I say, let them have their way on this.

As opposed to what?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
7. At least in the last two primaries I voted in the only way you could get a republican ballot
is if you were a registered republican

Democrats always allowed non-partisans to vote Democratic


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. In PA, if you are registered Independent, you can't vote in either Republican or Dem primaries.
It's what they call a "closed primary." It's kind of like, only club members can vote for club candidates, which makes a certain amount of sense. In the general election is when everybody can vote any party they want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikekohr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. It's the same in Illinois
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 07:18 AM by mikekohr
And in our county of Bureau, long dominated by the Republican Party, it is, as of the 2008 election results: 19% Democrat, 17% Republican and the remainder undeclared/independant.

This type of law puts most of the political decisions in the hands of the party activists (like myself) and discourages participation from the 64% of the electorate that refuse to declare. Party regulars for the most part are happy with this arrangement. I believe it further drives a wedge between the people and those elected to serve their interests.

mike kohr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertDiamond Donating Member (838 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
8. Have they lost their friggin' MINDS????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
9. yawn n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
10. Great move should happen more often in other states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
11. In the 90's Republicans would put one of their own...
as a Democrat and try to split the primary vote so the least favorable Democrat would win and make a victory in state electlions easier. Elsewhere, Republicans called for their own people to vote in Democratic primarys for a Democrat who can not the general election. They are concerned that Democratis might do that. They are worried that Democrats will vote in their elections and choose someone that isn't Republican enough, like Arnold. They have utterly rejected the "Big Tent" for the belief that only a they arn't Conservative enough, and they seem to believe that Americans rejected them because they did not live up to Conservative Ideals. Let them live their fantasy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. That's about it. Paranoid stupid bastards... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Indydem Donating Member (866 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #11
26. Many pukes believe thats what happened with McCain.
He was too centrist and alienated the conservative base. Watch as they try to engineer future electoral processes so that only the rabid right can run fr office.

I can't wait!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:44 AM
Response to Original message
14.  illinois you can only vote for a declared party during a primary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:55 AM
Response to Original message
15. Remember how they gamed the Democratic primaries once it was clear that their
candidate was McCain? This would prevent them from doing that.

Well, sort of, a little. Because it's a fairly easy thing to change your party registration, especially when Rush Limbaugh is reminding you daily to make sure you register Democrat in time to screw up the Democratic primary in your state. And you are inherently inclined to dirty tricks and dang proud of it.

A lot of states have the system they are trying to get. There are pros and cons are each side. Who cares? Their faithful are likely to nominate the least electible candidate, like Pat Robertson. Let em go for it. In fact, if you live in California, consider helping them out with this cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. They tried to "game" the California primary in 2008 by encouraging independents to vote for Obama
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 07:55 AM by slackmaster
As you may recall, in March of that year Hillary Clinton was leading in the polls. The California GOP rules in effect for that election did not allow independent (Declined To State in California parlance) voters to vote on the Presidential nomination. The change under discussion here would expand that restriction to other offices.

The influence of independent voters choosing a Republican ballot in the California primary of 2008 was insignificant. The small bump that Barack Obama may have recieved from a few independents making an "Anyone but Hillary" stand by voting for her in the Democratic primary, failed to keep Clinton from winning.

That all happened months before Rush Limbaugh egged people on to switch parties and vote for Clinton in Democratic primaries, after Obama took the lead in the polls.

Just an interesting footnote for those who may have forgotten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 04:33 AM
Response to Original message
16. It'll make counting votes in their primaries go much faster
It'll also give even more power to the far reich loons that inundate their party
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. It will reduce by a few the many flavors of ballots CA precinct workers have to deal with
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 07:29 AM by slackmaster
In California primary elections, because independent voters have the option of voting the party-specific ballot of any party that allows them to participate, the number of ballots based on party affiliation has been staggering.

Here are the parties as of the most recent election:

Democratic
Republican
American Independent
Green
Libertarian
Peace and Freedom

Add one for just plain independent, you get seven.

Now then, because the parties may restrict independents from fully participating (e.g. the GOP not allowing independes to choose a Presidential nominee), add one more flavor:

Independent voting in the Republican primary

That makes eight.

Multiply that by the number of languages in which balots are printed for your precinct. In mine they provide ballots in English, Spanish, Filipino, and Vietnamese. That makes 32 flavors. Take away the "independent voting Republican" versions and you still have 28.

Think of how likely errors are in so many versions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 06:48 AM
Response to Original message
17. One obvious out come is that the extreme of the extremists will only be elected.
Which cannot be good for either party. If they do go ahead with this , the Democrats should have a lot of fun and play around with them, even to go so far as take them to court to "protect the freedoms of the people" against this "undemocratic move".

Basically, call the repubs a bunch of stinking hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Heavily gerrymandered districts and a culture of incumbency already give us that
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 07:52 AM by slackmaster
Maybe redistricting reform which was voted in last year will change that in the 2012 election.

BTW, I got a very interesting phone call yesterday. I may be working with the plaintiff's team in a lawsuit by the ACLU, who is considering suing the city of San Diego for the way candidates without significant financial resources are systematically discriminated against in our elections here.

Incumbents almost alway win. When they get term-limited out, they get replaced by hand-picked Heirs Apparent, who get well funded, lots of automatic endorsements, and (usually) backed by their party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BumRushDaShow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
24. "They're treating the GOP like it's a club..."
And that club is the Illiterati! :rofl:

In their case, they have allowed the extremists to be those "insiders" (having chased the moderates away) and thus general election defeat will be a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
santamargarita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. A cult consisting of the most loathsome bastards on the Planet
:bluebox:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
27. Here in Michigan it changes from election to election...
Sometimes we have closed primaries, sometimes
we don't.

All states are different.

This is one of the reasons why certain states
always go first in Democratic Presidential
primaries, Iowa has a unique caucus system,
and New Hampshire has a partially closed
primary.

Each state has it's own rules, and some, like
Michigan, choose which ever is more feasible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
28. California traditionally had closed primary elections until 1996
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 09:24 AM by slackmaster
Our primaries are only open for independent voters - 20% as of May 4, 2009 (see http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ror/ror-pages/15day-stw... ).

One party making a change in its rules doesn't really amount to much.

K&U for making much ado about nothing.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
29. Awesome! They will pick some FR type candidate who can't get elected n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mulsh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
30. Brilliant strategy, sound inovative thinkink like you'd expect from the GOP.
I hope they adopt this rule for the primaries. I think it will do nothing be a benefit to our electoral process in this state. It certainly encourages people like my wife, who is unaffiliated, to freely exercising their choice. Bravo CA Republican party, bravo.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
31. I thought they already did this...
Hmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Only for the nomination for President of the United States and their own party officials
DTS (independent) voters could get a GOP primary ballot with the pages for the Presidential race and GOP party officials left blank.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##



This week is our third quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
35. the GOP is a paranoid cult
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 02:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC