MI (D) party encouraging cross voting in primary...thoughts?

[alp227]

a washingtonpost.com blog post reports "Michigan Democratic Party encourages crossover voting in GOP presidential primary":

The Michigan Democratic Party sent an e-mail to supporters Wednesday encouraging them to take part in the state’s Republican presidential primary on Tuesday.

The e-mail points to a YouTube video of two Republican state senators encouraging Democrats to vote and notes that voters can still return to voting in the Democratic caucuses two months from now.

“Any Democrat who takes Senators Jones and Meekhof up on their offer will still be able to participate in the Michigan Democratic Party’s presidential caucuses on May 5, 2012,” Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer said in the brief missive. “If Democratic crossover votes affect the results of the GOP presidential primary next Tuesday, the Republicans will only have themselves to blame.”

(...)

Likewise, just four years ago Rush Limbaugh encouraged Republicans to cross over and vote for Hillary Clinton when President Obama was on the verge of winning the nomination.

the video:

a comment on washingtonpost.com pointed out, "in Michigan you only get to choose to vote in one primary". And given that voting for a primary challenger for Obama at this point is just ineffective, I think now: Conservatives consider Rick Santorum the most conservative candidate. The cool thing about voting for Santorum in the primary is that Michigan liberals will do the Republicans both a blessing and curse. The conservative base will be energized, while independents will be scared away. On the other hand, what about those liberals who have a soft spot for Ron Paul?

Here's a similar thread from 2008 about cross voting in Michigan.

By the way, I lived in Michigan during my early childhood, pretty much during Clinton's first term before moving to California, where presidential primaries are closed, even after [link:|Prop. 14 made primaries for other non federal offices open primaries.

[mucifer]

1. cross voting seems pretty sleazy to me.

[hayrow1]

3. There is nothing sleazy about it....

If you want to win a presidential election by sticking to the Marquis of Queensbury rules, you will lose. Obama knew that in 2008 and still knows it. There are situations where the end justifies the means, and defeating the Repukes of 2012 in every major election are examples of those situations.

[a2liberal]

16. Not if they welcome you...

[hayrow1]

2. In Wisconsin the primary has always been open......

and every presidential primary many Democrats, and I always, vote to screw over the Republican front runner. This year, however, which is the Repuke to vote for to try to assure a brokered Repuke convention? If things are on April 3 as they are now, that would probably mean voting for Santorum?

[Motown_Johnny]

4. This is why we hold open primaries

If it were a closed primary then switching parties for no reason other than to vote in the primary would be immoral.

I'm going to vote for Frothy. I've been looking forward to registering a protest vote ever since "Operation Chaos" in 2008.


I am curious if the polls we have all been seeing include (D)s and (I)s who are not likely to vote in a (R) primary but who will this time around. These polls may all be off, maybe even way way off.

Gonna be an interesting week.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

5. My thought: why bother?

I would not know which Republican is the "best" opponent. All of them seem equally beatable in the fall.

It would be sort of fun if we could have Ron Paul win. He's the least "Republican" of the bunch. I think even the Repubs think he's wacky.

Maybe it would be good payback for 1972(?) when Republicans voted in the Democratic primary and gave George Wallace the win. But only if there was a clear choice between a Republican "winner" and a Republican "loser". This year, they're all losers.

[hayrow1]

6. You miss the point entirely....

The idea is you make the Repukes work harder and spend more money to attempt to prevent the nightmare of a brokered convention. A brokered convention will shine a light on the utter ugliness of politics, especially Republican politics. A brokered convention will create fault lines between Repuklican factions that will take years to heal, and hopefully will provide a great picture like the 1964 classic Nelson Rockefeller response to convention jeers. The goal, in addition to re-electing Obama, is to try to destroy the sickest thing to happen in American politics since slavery, the 2012 Repuklican Party.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

7. To help force a brokered convention, who should win MI?

We should probably select a candidate who is going to lose Super Tuesday, to keep the race close. Lemme find my crystal ball ...

[hayrow1]

8. Per Meghan McCain's analysis.....Santorum....

Romney still has the most money. Newt has no chance. Paul will stay in the race no matter what.

Good luck with convincing your soul to not amputate your hand afterwords. Being right handed I need to use my left hand when I vote in Repuke primaries.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

9. Interesting discussion, but I can't vote "R" anyway

I already screwed up my primary participation.

I went to the city clerk's office to get an absentee ballot. The clerk casually asked what party I'm with, and I answered "Democratic" without thinking. Ooops. So I wound up with the dumbest ballot ever. No proposals, nothing but a choice between Obama and Uncommited.

No fun at all.

[Bozita]

10. Count me as another vote for Sanctimonium.

I wanna see the GOPers battle it out until the GOPer convention.

The more they talk, the more they debate, the more they scare off the independent voter.

Sanctimonium, at least until Convention time!

I think we're witnessing the equivalent of the snake swallowing its tail.

[PassingFair]

11. I'm thinking of voting for Ron Paul....just for fun.

Do you think I would better sabotage Republican hopes and dreams by voting for Santorum?

I REALLY would HATE for him to be the actual candidate. He's my LEAST favorite ...well...he
ties with Newt.

Maybe I should vote for Newt?

[BeatleBoot]

12. I'm spreading the word...vote for nutjob Sanitorium!

[tokenlib]

13. I'm with Frothy--just to attempt to humiliate Willard

I want to see the GOP establishment squirm. I resent Romney and his campaign's arrogance. And I trust that Santorum doesn't have any more than a prayer for his future prospects.
Based on the polls--a bunch of Dems really could throw the result on Tuesday.

A Santorum victory also helps paint the Michigan GOP as extreme and overreaching--which can only "help" "Snide-er" get weaker...

[Motown_Johnny]

14. Same here

The worse he looks the better. Odds are he will still win the nomination but it will be much harder if he loses here.

[LovingA2andMI]

15. Ummmm.....I don't know

Not sleazy....would not go that far but, I can't think of anyone on that side I would feel comfortable enough to check a ballot for. No one, none of them. Not at all.

[a2liberal]

17. I know the feeling

I've had to struggle with it but came to terms with it by deciding that I'm helping select the Republican nominee, not the actual President. My voting today helps (in the abstract sense) the Democrat in the general election.