Loading ...POST-ELECTILE DISFUNCTION
I took a few days off after the primary to recharge the political batteries and it’s good to be back.
A lot of us are still dissecting Tuesday’s primary results and what they mean in the grand scheme of things. Although many of my colleagues will say high voter turnout was a good thing in this election (close to or exceeding the 2006 general election) I respectfully disagree.
I don’t think more participation is a good idea when the people coming out are voting for the wrong reason. I prefer a few smart people coming together to make a decision rather than a lot of stupid people. If the intellect of the voters are as high as the turnout then I’m excited. Otherwise, God save the Republic.
That also brings me to my next point which goes to the Limbaugh fans who participated in Operation Chaos, the Rush-inspired plan for Republicans and conservatives to vote in the Democratic primary in an effort to drag the fight to the convention floor, thus making the eventual nominee that much more vulnerable in the Fall.
I hope you know that by pulling a Democrat ballot in Indiana you are declaring your intent to vote for a majority of Democratic candidates in November. You could have been (and some were) challenged to sign an affidavit saying you had or will vote for a majority of Democrats in a past or future election. If you don’t , you’re violating Indiana law. Now some of you might be saying there’s no way you would ever get caught so what difference does it make? Easy, it goes to the character issue you people keep harping on. Isn’t character defined as what you do when no one is looking and you won’t get caught?
It’s one thing if you pulled a Democrat ballot with the intent to vote for a majority of Democrats, later saw who won the primary and later changed your mind. But for many of the Operation Chaos participants they likely have no intent for voting for a majority of Democrats this Fall. So I for one find it totally ironic that the same people who go on and on and on about character, ethics and the rule of law apparently have no problem throwing those values out the window if they think they can get away with it. I won’t call them lawbreakers yet because they have until November to redeem themselves. But if they don’t they are no different than the people they criticize. Actually they’re worse because they’re hypocrites.
Open the floodgates and let the rationalization begin. This is going to be fun.
May 11th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
All is fair in love, war, and politics.
May 11th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
The two lesser of three abysmal Presidential choices duking it out further had some allure. But, I was unsuccessfully preoccupied with Operation Idiot(Dan Burton) versus Operation Chaos. Point made and respected, Abdul, as I despise the tacit approval of our country being illegally overrun. We’re not going to pull out out of our collective, overwhelming national challenges without sufficient buy-in that the needed mutual sacrifices are fair. In the current sociological and political climate, that means not justly being stigmatized as racist, sexist, zenphobic- or hypocritical.
May 11th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Wow Leon, your powers of logic and political commentary really shine with such an insightful comment.
Abdul, I probably don’t agree with most of your policy positions, but I respect your consistency in them.
The whole thing reminds me of a pro football team that hopes for a weaker team to win a playoff game. The strongest teams usually savor the chance to play the best, instead of beating the weakest. This kind of “Operation” just shows how weak Republicans feel. This is an act of desperation. It is an act that shows how they feel about their own candidate.
Our focus should be about engaging each other in the arena of ideas, not winning for for the sake of it. This isn’t a game, it’s our country.
And the most ironic thing is that even though Barack lost Indiana, the “Operation” was a failure. It isn’t going to stop him from taking the nomination.
To all those that traded in their integrity for a win, all I can say is that I hope it was worth it.
May 11th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
I am a Republican and voted in the Republican primary. I actually worked the polls as a Republican observer.
.
That being said, I am interested in the outpouring of outrage over some Republicans voting in the Democratic primary. There was no similar outrage when Democrats voted in the Republican primaries in Michigan, New Hampshire and probably Florida–and this was far more influential in the outcome of the Republican nomination than Operation Chaos.
.
If this is a real problem, there is a simple solution: make it a closed primary. The Indiana law is completely unenforceable and possibly unconstitutional.
.
This primary probably had the highest percentage of voters who actually knew what they were voting about. And that is what I want to see.
May 11th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Abdul, I basically agree with you but I consider myself a free thinker and an Independent when it comes to politics. Isn’t the fact that the two party system run by private organizations is a big problem we have with our system. Isn’t the fact that you must declare yourself something, being republican or democrat, when you are neither, isn’t THAT being hypocritical? I feel I should be able to vote for whom I want, when I want whether I have to declare a party or not. Shouldn’t THAT be our basic right?
May 11th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
It is too often the case in Indiana that gerrymandered districts render the November general elections superfluous. The real choices often occur in the primary election. That was certainly the case this year in the 5th CD, where the winner of the May primary will certainly be elected in November. That’s why I have no problem asking for either party’s ballot in the primary, depending upon the races that year.
I consider my position on this no less disingenuous than the folks who rig the district boundry maps to deny me real choices in general elections.
And if party switchers bother you, shouldn’t you endorse a closed primary system? Doesn’t an open primary invite mischief?
May 11th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
ABDUL SAID: I prefer a few smart people coming together to make a decision rather than a lot of stupid people. If the intellect of the voters are as high as the turnout then I’m excited. Otherwise, God save the Republic.
Isn’t the Republic saved when everyone does his or her part, whether he or she is stupid or brilliant? The whole reason for the Republic (individuals voting for representatives to carry their interests to government) is to give each person a voice and the opportunity for it to be heard, right?
So isn’t the problem right now that too few are participating as it is?
May 11th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Abdul, I’m sure you don’t really mean the first 2 sentences of your 2nd paragraph, unless you spent too much time at Al-Jazeera. To restrict given Constitutional rights to the Intelligencia sounds eletist. I could use the same logic in saying why should the electorate be any less hypocritical in a system layered already in hypocracy and self indulgence by existing candidates. Politics and our vote is about a desired result. Don’t blame the electorate for joining the game. Before we get on our high horse, become self appointed aristocrats and usurpt the rights of those we call ‘a lot of stupid people’, I would submit examination of more pertinent issues such as general apathy of Hoosiers in allowing a minority of people to locally re-nominate those who created and perpetuate our property tax debacle. When that moral question is answered, I’ll agree with you “God save the Republic”.
May 11th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Why are you whining again Abdul? Joel, anonymous123, and Rita, THANK YOU for being so eloquent.
-
I know a woman in PA, which HAS a closed primary, who switched to D because she wanted to vote for Billary. Should she be denied? No, because free choice is what living in America is about.
May 11th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
I think it should be unconstitutional to have to declare what party you want to vote in, and that determine who you vote for in the next. I’m a republican, only voted democrat 2x. Peterson and Anderson in their first terms. that really bit me in the butt!! i actually thought they would be better than the weak republicans the county R’s picked for us.
anyway, should it be against the law to vote for a candidate because he is black? 90% of blacks voted for Obama even though there is another Democratic candidate to choose from. should it be against the law to vote for a candidate because she is a woman? i don’t know the stats but a large part of the female voters voted for Hillary. I would say it both are just as wrong as voting for McCain because he’s a white man. the libertarian in me, and i would say a lot of people, thinks you should be able to vote for whom you want for whatever reason you want. you risk the chance of wasting your vote. or voting for two people you never really wanted in the first place. e.g. my 2 democrat votes.
then again there the strict constitutional side, which i think i may be more in favor of. people don’t vote for president directly. you actually vote and get an electoral college rep. then that person votes for president. the electoral college is basically your congressmen and senators. the right to vote (federal elections), was really limited to a few people. those people were generally very educated and voted for what they thought was best for the country. not their their own self interests. though blacks and women couldn’t vote for anything, which of coarse was unconstitutional and took many years to fix. It’s all a big mess.
May 11th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Abdul, I gotta hand it to ya. You tried. The posters who fall all over themselves screaming for liberty, don’t understand the system, the law or practical cause/effect politics.
Whether we like it or not, Indiana’s closed primary system is rather unique in the national spectrum. No other state has a law like ours: whatever ballot you take in a primary, you promise to either have voted for a majority of their candidates in the last general election, or you will in the next one. Which is really pretty simple. If you don’t like it, talk to your state legislator. And good luck with that.
My Republican precinct clerk and judge, a rather portly and annoying older couple, pulled Democratic ballots after being general pains in the ass all day. They’re that way every election. She’s still pissed the Republicans aren’t inspectors any more. They live not in Indiana, but in the State of Denial.
The result? They’re now legally self-defined Democrats. And my party will not appoint them to work in the general election polling. Mostly because they’re obnoxious, but also because the geniuses, who are solid Limbaugh dittoheads, have now legally switched parties.
They have no idea what they’ve done. Take that, El Rushbo! You might wanna consider the impact of your lame ego-centric suggestions, before you make them, lardass. I know, I know…prescription drug abuse can play with your mind.
Primaries are closed for a reason: basically, they replaced party conventions. Maybe we should go back to that, but until we do, the law is quite clear and concise.
May 11th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
I have 1 vote to use at my discretion. No one has a right to dictate my vote either republican or democrat. Best candidate forward…
May 11th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
In the divisive 1960 presidential election only 16 states out of 50 had so-called open primaries. Indiana was one of the 16. All the other state’s political parties nominated their presidential delegates at their respective party’s state conventions.
Do away with these stupid expensive open primary beauty contests and move the selection of delegates back to state conventions.
If people don’t want to get involved in party politics again then they can vote for whomever the parties put on the menu in the national election.
We do not and never have had a constitutional right to select candidates for president. That job is left up to each political party to do in any way they see fit.
How many Republican’s crossed over to vote in the Democrat’s Iowa caucuses? NONE!
Open primaries are a joke.
May 11th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
I disagree with Abdul’s point on the constitutional question - it’s not up to the government to monitor parties - but even more on the premise that the state government shouldn’t have anything to do with primaries.
Why should my tax dollars be used to hold primary elections for political parties ? If you said “cause it’s always been that way” YOU must be a product of IPS.
I’m a product of IPS too, though, so touche’ on me !
The only reason school board elections are held in May is to justify making taxpayers pay for the political parties’ primaries.
May 11th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Abdul–I regularly work the polls, and was utterly amazed and appalled at the ignorance of the voters on Tuesday. Some didn’t know where their polling place was or how to find it (several wandered in like it was shopping at WalMart, just stop at any one and transact your business), why they had to declare a party, what a primary was, what party their favorite candidate was, or how to fill in the circles. I agree with you, ignorant voters are worse than not voting at all. Our system of government depends on an INFORMED electorate!
May 11th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
The Star today reports that it is illegal to encourage someone to violate this voter law in Indiana. A courageous prosecutor would issue a warrant for Rush Limbaughs arrest, arrange a sensible minded rich republican with a jet and go get him and bring him back for trial. That being said, Abdul your commentary was correct and on the money every penny. What makes is so evident is all those republicans defending their actions as if they possess the character they do not. This country is indeed in bad shape. How about Obama firing his Middle East advisor for meeting with Hamas? An act he criticised Carter for? The media is looking right on past it.
May 11th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Frankly, the political parties have perpetuated a scam by getting the taxpayers to pay for their private party candidate selection and by rigging the system to limit ballot access to anyone divering from the status quo.
I switch parties all the time because I don’t belong to either, and if I have to help pay for the primary, I am going to vote in it.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:03 am
CJ, Indiana has never, ever has an open primary.
We did have state conventions to choose statewide nominees and presidential delegates until, I believe, 1976.
But our primary system has forever been closed.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Think Again, as a Precinct Committeeman I recruit the Republican poll workers for my precinct. At least in Hamilton County there is not a requirement that those workers actually have voted in the Republican primary in their last voted primary. In other words, the Republicans can still place the two that you find obnoxious as the Republican judge and clerk.
.
Jay, I believe that School Board elections are held in May so that new School Boards can be seated in the summer before the beginning of the school year.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Indiana’s primary may technically be “closed”, but certainly it is not closed in the sense that others are. We do not have a registration that declares our party. It is only based on what we individually declare we either had voted for or will vote for in the general election. Yet we have a long-standing value (if not constitutional protection) of a secret ballot. This means that the State (or a Party) really has no business asking me how I vote in the general election. Since it is based simply on my declaration at the poll, we are, in practice, an open primary.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:49 am
The Republican Party—what’s left of it—needs to improve its candidates and its grass-roots participation and organization to get a convincing message to the voters through its own channels. This chaos stuff is at best an entertaining diversion.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Think Again, think again. Open presidential primaries in 1960 were conducted in 16 states of which Indiana was one. Please refer to 1960 Presidential Primary via Google if you wish.
Don’t confuse the state party conventions and the candidates selected in them with the presidential and gubernatorial primary.
I voted in the 1960 democratic primary in Indiana and it was open, just as it is today.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:53 am
It’s real simple. If you’re not a member of the party, you shouldn’t have any say in who that party nominates for President, or any office for that matter.
If you want a voice in a political partys nomination, join the party. Close the primaries.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:03 am
These days, what does it take to be a member of a party? I’m a Republican; are there dues or something I need to pay in to get my picture ID and secret decoder ring.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:08 am
I participated in Operation Chaos just so I could ensure Schellinger didn’t run against the Governor in the fall. I also wanted to make sure that Hillary stays in the race. No one can make me be Republican or Democrat. For the record, I do support a democrat once in a while like Abu Henderson. I also ignorantly voted for Bart both times.
.
As long as the taxpayer has to fund the existence of primary elections so private parties can slate their candidates, don’t blame the people if they screw with it.
.
For the record, I think BOTH the republicans and democrats are liars and thieves as evidenced by their actions toward the people.
May 12th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Although I think operation zombie is one of the most innane ploys ever dreamed up in search of ratings, I must give Melyssa a big “AMEN”!
Capt O - You don’t want me to vote in your primary? Then put your money where your mouth is. But since we both know that you’re not willing to foot the bill, may I suggest that you try to find a candidate that has broader appeal instead.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
With British butler accent, “Ahhh, the booth awaits you over there, Madam. And, will you be voting for the skunks or the weasels this year, Madam?”
May 12th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
I didn’t participate in Operation
Chaos or help publicize the idea except to screw with the system. The system deserves a good screwing with, don’t you think?
.
What I can’t believe is how many people went to the polls with no idea what a primary election is, who pays to put it on, or the simple fact that it is an election to participate in choosing the general election slate for PRIVATE parties.
.
If the little old Libertarians have their act together enough to slate a candidate for office without making the taxpayer foot the bill for it, why can’t the so-called big boys in politics concerned enough with the plight of the taxpayer to do it too?
May 12th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
When both major parties can fit into a corner of a restaurant Melyssa, I’m sure they will. You’re absurd.
May 12th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Absurd? No, I just resent being forced to pay the bill for these two parties to slate their candidates when I am disgusted personally by both of them. Why should I have to pay for a service I want no part of?
Further, the democrats seemed to have no problem whatsoever slating Andre Carson for the special election.
I don’t recall that they squeezed into a corner of a restaurant, rather they used a large auditorium.
It is you that is absurd.
May 12th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Maybe all the Libertarian legislators at the Statehouse can get the election laws changed for Melyssa’s pleasure?
May 12th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Wilson, just because something is done a certain way does not mean it is just or fair. More and more people are disgusted by Republican and Democrat party politics and more you will see them defect. Continue doing what you do, Wilson…for you are are part of the problem with party politics. You couldn’t think for yourself if your life depended on it. Some of us can think independently and justly resent being forced through taxation to pay for two private parties to slate their candidates.
.
Rather than think for yourself, you defend the liar, Andre Carson who promised us in the 7th district he would not miss a single congressional vote AND run for the primary. Guess what? He missed several votes, Wilson.
.
Now, I don’t expect you to acknowledge that it is true Carson missed votes. Usually when you are proven wrong in public you slink back to that falling down hole you live in and leave us alone for awhile.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Abdul–
i think you were right about Rs who voted for Hillary also voting for Woody and Jill Long. As much as I would love to spend an hour typting the negative things i think about Jim Schellinger and his canidacy…I will instead take the high road and say based on your analysis and my analysis with what i saw and know of people who partook in “operation chaos”, i believe it had an down ballot effect and cost him the primary.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Mely you spent a lot of breath on a wasted effort. He is a photograph of everything that is wrong in the political party system. And, he is not different than the other party either. There isn’t 10 cents difference between the parties these days. That is why I ignore the party label and vote for the individual and what he/she stands for. I would bet most the current powerhouses in the Democratic/Republican Party have no idea what caused the birth of their party, what ideologies they have traditionally represented, etc.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Missouri…I know I am. One of the things that amazed me is that nearly everyone I work with didn’t understand that the primary is a taxpayer funded election for private parties to decide who they want to slate.
.
And yes, Wilson is a glaring example of what is wrong with both the parties. And neither party seems to do a damned thing about holding their candidates reponsible to keep their word.
.
Didn’t I tell you Wilson would go slinking away when I mentioned Carson missing votes?
May 12th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
My earlier attempt at humor was just that. I agree with those fed-up with never-ending, juvenile turf battles over self-serving party inanity while our country keeps sinking. We’re losing ground and time on about any important issue you can think of, as our leaders spin fairy tales to people who want to believe in something besides tough times. Facing reality together, we can put up a good fight for our kids and old age. Divided, if Nero fiddled as Rome burned- we got a whole string section tuning-up.
May 12th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
…and poor Melyssa dropped out of public sight and politics after her spectacular noisy drunken outburst at an IUPUI Debate this spring. Now I understand why the Libertarians didnt want her representing them for public office!
May 12th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
The older system of choosing candidates was smoke filled rooms–aka party caucuses/conventions. Generally folk decided they wanted something with more participation and more “democratic” and that is when States started funding primaries. Good or bad? I don’t know.
.
Some of the discussion reminded me of one Democrat that came to the primary in the precinct that I was working. She wanted to know how to vote straight party. Ha!
May 13th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Wilson I was stone cold sober when I spoke to you without mincing words. I only said what everyone else was thinking. And as far as the Libertarians not wanting me to represent them…they sure to call on me often for help and insight.
So…again, what about Carson’s representation of us and his failure to keep his promise to never miss a vote? I’m a private citizen and what I do is MY business. Carson is not. Please answer for his lies to the people of the 7th district. .