Voting Peevement

[rebeccmeister]

Let it be known that I am peeved that Arizona voters registered as Independents have no say in the Presidentiary Primaries on Super Tuesday.

As someone who votes regularly in every single election (even the ones where the only measures are approval of bond measures for funding for local schooling), I'll be keeping this in mind when I vote for my state leaders.

I'm tempted to show up to the polls on Feb. 5 to see if there's any way of leaving a record that I tried to vote and failed.

Comments

[whetherwoman.livejournal.com]

But it's not an election. It's each political party deciding who they want to be their nominee. It's like... if a committee was voting on the chair of the committee and someone from outside the committee wanted to vote on the chair too. It might impact them, but they're still not on the committee. As a registered Democrat, I couldn't vote in the Republican primary even if I thought that the Republican party nominee was the more important person to throw my voice towards.

Course, other states do have open primaries, so maybe it would work better to do that here.

(When I registered to vote, one of the best bits I overheard was a clerk telling a guy, "No, you can't be an Independent Republican. You have to pick one or the other.")

[rebeccmeister.livejournal.com]

Here's the thing--Independents made a huge difference in the New Hampshire primaries, and the chances are that they could make a huge difference in the general election as well. It seems to me like the primary is a good opportunity for the political parties to get an idea of how the independents will end up voting in the presidential election, so it's kind of a missed opportunity for them. I suppose I could register in advance as one party member or another for the sake of the primaries, but I really don't want them to take my decision or allegiance for granted, so I haven't. And I won't.

Also, consider the Florida primary, which doesn't officially "count" for anything because of the moved-up election date. I suspect many people will vote anyway, and you'd better believe the candidates will be taking that into consideration.

[annikusrex.livejournal.com]

People will vote anyway in Florida, mostly because there are other issues on the ballot, but the Democratic candidates were banned from campaigning there, so voters in Florida have not really seen the range of arguments that each contender has presented for their candidacy. The Democrats should not seat delegates from Florida at the national convention unless the nomination has already been wrapped up by that time. This would be unfair to the very voters--and non-voters who were told their votes wouldn't count--it pretends to honor.

More on the refusal to affiliate issue below.

[elmocho.livejournal.com]

I'm an Independent too. I've thought about changing my affiliation just to wreak havoc, but realize that would be as cynical a ploy as more organized poll-tampering.

[sandokai.livejournal.com]

That is why I switched from Independent to Democrat. It's annoying that we should have to, though. Some states any party can vote any other party in primaries. It should be the same in every state.

[trywhy.livejournal.com]

My father registered as a Republican, specifically so he could vote for the least electable candidate in the primaries. I don't know that it has necessarily worked ever.

[mopsie2002.livejournal.com]

Independents can't vote in the primaries in Oregon, either.

[solar-diablo.livejournal.com]

It's a little annoying during particularly close races like this year, but like someone said above, primaries are like a private party I got an invitation to but snubbed when I registered as an Independent. I'm content to bide my time and watch the infighting from a distance, particularly since the difference between any of the leading candidates feels insignificant enough that I'm not particularly miffed about being unable to vote for Brand X, Y, or Z.

[annikusrex.livejournal.com]

I'm an independent here in Washington, but we have aggressively open primaries. (Like, so open that it's apparently possible to caucus with the Democrats on February 9 and then the next weekend, vote on the Republican ticket in the primary--you have to break an oath to do so, but there's really nothing stopping you.) However, I think it only hurts yourself not to register with a party in a state with closed primaries. I usually think Stanley Fish is full of shit, but his column on this subject was right on.

Now, voting the person rather than the party is about the dumbest thing you can do for a reason I elaborated in an earlier column (“Parties Matter”). The party affiliation of a candidate tells you what kind of appointments he or she is likely to make. Do you think that regulations of industry stifle productivity and damage the economy, or do you think that unregulated industries endanger the environment? Do you think that illegal immigrants are just that – illegal – and therefore should be deported when detected, or do you think that we should figure out a way to legitimize their status and make the best of what has already happened? Do you think that Iran poses a threat that must be countered before it is too late, or do you think that military action should be resorted to only after every avenue of diplomacy has been exhausted, even if it takes years or decades?

If you feel strongly about these and other matters, it is incumbent upon you to take into consideration the positions of the two major parties, for the successful candidate can be counted on to appoint to the offices responsible for answering these questions men and women whose views reflect the party’s platform. Voting the person, however attractive or impressive he or she may be, could very well get you four years of policies you detest. In other words, policy differences are party differences, and it is hard to see how you could be a responsible voter if you held your nose at a whiff of party politics. If you are really interested in the way things should go in the country, come off the high pedestal and join the rest of us in the nurturing (and, yes, dirty) soil of the partisan free-for-all.

I prefer to think of myself as an lefty independent, primarily because I want to reserve the right to vote for Greens in local elections. But I can already do that! If you live in a state with a closed primary and you want to affect the choice of the next president of the United States, you have to suck it up and temporarily--you can always switch next election--affiliate with a party.

No system is perfect, and this supposed problem would be even worse if we had a parliamentary system, which many independents would prefer because it better accommodates third parties. You never get to pick the prime minister in a parliamentary system; you just have to trust that the people you elect will select someone who shares your positions.

Politics is not always pleasant, but it is always strategic. If you want to affect its outcomes, you have to vote and declare party affiliation strategically too. Maybe I'll Slog about this.

[rebeccmeister.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, from what I understand it's too late for me to switch my registration for this primary. I haven't looked into the matter too carefully, but in any case I'm going to stubbornly insist on retaining my current position as an Independent. Perhaps it's not subtly strategic, but it's still strategic.

When I get to vote in the general election, you'd better believe I'll be taking the candidate's political affiliation into consideration.

[annikusrex.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is too late, which is why I'm hectoring you (sorry!) and not sending you party registration materials.

But really--how is it strategic, exactly? I assure you, the Ds already have you pegged demographically. A woman who makes less than 75K, lives in an urban area, and has had some graduate school? You're a D: the odds are probably 80% or higher. There's no fooling the pollsters, even if you hide out in your official Independent category. The way to not let parties take you for granted is to join them, vote in their primaries, and get the candidate you want into office. There's no power in relinquishing your voice.

[rebeccmeister.livejournal.com]

Did I claim it was strategic? I can't recall now. Perhaps it's a crude strategy, or non-strategic, but party politics are an odd beast in this Libertarian state. I suppose I could get involved from the inside and get my hands dirty, but frankly I don't have the time to make informed decisions in that respect, either. And do they really know that I'm in that category, or the general Independent demography, if there is such a thing?

And as a behavioral note, I will probably end up voting for our incumbent Republican mayor soon.

Altogether, though, I just don't have the patience to put up with a lot of the political process. And there you have it. Actually, that makes me wonder--what would it take to get me more in the loop? I get the impression that people our age are getting more politically active, but is it in a way that gives them hope about political processes?

[(Anonymous)]

Tee hee. Yes, you said, "Perhaps it's not subtly strategic, but it's still strategic."

The party doesn't know you, specifically, are in that category. But they do know that people with your general economic and social interests are going to tend to vote a certain way in national elections--I mean, correct me if I'm wrong and you really wanted to vote for Huckabee or something. Stranger things have happened. But, for example, your intention to vote for an R mayor doesn't necessarily apply. National elections change the tax structure, affect foreign policy, affect environmental regulation, affect the choice of Supreme Court justices--those sort of clearly partisan things happen on a national level. Locally, your issues are probably more or less non-partisan: either party can be big on law enforcement, and most major taxes are levied by the state, not the cities. That said, stuff like mass transit is somewhat partisan, and that does play itself out locally.

I definitely sympathize with not being able to put up with the political process. The day-to-day business of politics is only fun if you have a horse in the race: it's not about substantive issues, for the most part. But you don't have to do anything when you join a party. You can even vote against that party in the general election. All you're saying is, "To some degree, I sympathize with this party's platform. I want to influence its choice of nominees."

All I can speak to with regard to kids in the political process is I was totally in that category in 2004, and yeah. It gave me a lot of hope. My preferred nominee didn't make it through, of course, but I saw how ordinary individuals were able to organize and submit platforms for the party's platform that made it all the way to to the state level. And I also saw that the people who are usually involved in politics are crazy! It made me really want to get normal people with smart, unorthodox ideas into the process. It's so easy.