Well, they did it again. There is a well known saying that American politics is split between the Evil Party (Democrats) and the Stupid Party (Republicans). Last Saturday, on August 13, the Michigan Republican Party proved the truth of it in an emphatic way. The elected leadership got together in Lansing and voted 92-17 to hold a primary, open to the public, to nominate the next Republican candidate for President. This illuminating choice comes at a time when the Democrats are not going to hold a 2012 primary for their own candidate - Obama will be automatically re-nominated in a private caucus of Dem party officials. The Democrats are already using the ten million dollar cost of a 2012 spring primary for publicity to blame Republicans for wasting public tax dollars at a time when Michigan must sharply cut spending, while their own nomination will cost nothing.

     In a recent happy-talk Republican party announcement, it was called a "closed primary". Since the only requirement to vote is signing a piece of paper saying "Yes, I really, really, REALLY am a Republican, honest Injun", in practice it will be a completely open one. There is no limitation on how one voted in the past or future. Be a Republican for a day, it's fun and effective!

     What normally happens in Michigan elections? For examples from the recent past, here are the turnout numbers in a couple of comparable Michigan primaries.

In 2002 (last previous no-incumbent competitive primary for governor):

    *   583,385 votes were cast in the Republican gubernatorial primary.
    * 1,046,673 votes were cast in the Democrat gubernatorial primary.

 In 2010 (when polls and press made it clear in advance that Democrats would lose):

    * 1,043,619 votes were cast in the Republican gubernatorial primary.
    *   524,785 votes were cast in the Democrat gubernatorial primary.
 Kind of shows you how Mr.Snyder got nominated, doesn't it?

     The 2012 primary, set on or shortly after February 28, will have a Republican presidential ballot. Period. No place to vote for anyone on the Democratic side. This is the same election date scheduled for the recalls of some Republican state legislators. (It was promoted by Democrats and unions angry at new laws allowing the state to take financial control of bankrupt school districts.) Judging by the success of the recall petitions, there will be substantial numbers of motivated and angry Democrats turning out to vote that day. Once they are already in the voting booth, what do you think they are going to do with the presidential ballot?

     Last weekend, I saw Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer being interviewed on Tim Skubick's 'Off The Record' TV show. He was having fun - he came right out and said, essentially, that the Republicans were idiots to put the presidential primary on the same day as the legislator recalls. Here is the video (starts at about 20 minutes in):  http://wkar.org/offtherecord/program/4107/

     Why would the Republican hierarchy hand the presidential nomination to the Democrats on a silver platter? One has to conclude one of two possibilities:
1. Republican party bosses are congenitally stupid, and happy to hand their choice of nominee to the opposite party, or
2. The establishment power brokers don't actually care what kind of candidate gets elected. They just want the control, influence, and well paid positions that come with having their party in power. The appeal of getting on board the Romney bandwagon must be stronger than any other consideration. Given some recent dictates to Republican district committees that came out of Lansing, it appears as if Mr. Snyder's ability to cancel out any principle-based leadership is dominant and unquestioned. Nobody is willing to rock the boat, for fear that they might lose lucrative future advancement opportunities. I guess they're happy enough to maintain the illusion of a candidate that was actually nominated by Republicans, for as long as the primary season lasts, and then expect everyone to pull together in unity to help get the RINO elected.

     For those who want to see Mr. Romney nominated, you've got your wish in advance, as far as Michigan is concerned. The fix is in already- unless he gets hit by a bus between now and February, this primary setup has a built in leftward pull that will prevent any conservatives from having a chance. (If that bus does somehow arrive, Romney's Mini-Me Huntsman will be the stand in.) Two Novembers from now, we will be stuck with a choice between voting for Romneycare or Obamacare; another McCain versus Obama. Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting that the results will somehow be different this time. Each election you wonder how, in a country of 300 million people, we could possibly end up with such miserable choices?     

     It's not surprising that people get cynical about politics. Is the only option to just follow the lead of the ambitious, self-serving, RINO-mongering toadies in the Michigan GOP hierarchy, and hand the presidential nomination to the Democrats? I guess since there are never any consequences, there's no reason anything will ever change. You can't fix the Democrat problem until you first fix the Republican problem. That obviously hasn't happened yet.

Some information sources:





Views: 197

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

     More from the PPP Michigan poll - could it be that being the Not-Romney is NOT going to be a disadvantage? Fascinating new twists and turns - maybe the Republican establishment has been hoist with its own petard.

Can't stand Romney? Apparently, neither can the Democrats:

" .....
    Santorum’s winning an outright majority of the Tea Party vote with 53% to 22% for Romney and 10% for Gingrich. He comes close to one with Evangelicals as well at 48% to 20% for Romney and 12% for Gingrich. And he cracks the 50% line with voters identifying as ‘very conservative’ at 51% to 20% for Romney and 10% for Gingrich.

    Santorum’s benefiting from the open nature of Michigan’s primary as well. He’s only up by 12 points with actual Republican voters, but he has a 40-21 advantage with the Democrats and independents planning to vote that pushes his overall lead up to 15 points. Santorum is winning by a healthy margin in every region of the state except for Oakland County, where Romney has a 40-26 advantage, and the area around Lansing where Paul actually has an advantage at 30% to 27% for both Romney and Santorum.

Full post: Link

This is going to be too hilarious if it comes true.

The allegation that republicans are not the only voters in the primary does not prove that Santorum is disadvantaged.  You haven't even listed the 4 elements necessary to make a claim.  

You also failed to prove that the Michigan Republican State Committee wanted non-republicans to vote.  The only known fact is that the committee voted to have a closed primary.  The vote does not prove that the committee wanted non-republican votes.  

You are just speculating.

Right out in the open - "Democrats hoping to play in the Republican race". A liberal columnist dispenses hints for Democrats that are "thinking strategically", and who they might want to vote for on February 28.



"For strategic voters with a penchant for independent action, presidential primary season is the most wonderful time of every four years. .....
In a state where nobody has to register as a party member, that request may be less of an obstacle to mischief-friendly Democrats than the Republican lineup.
"Be careful what you wish for," Mitchell says.
My advice: If you aren't voting for the one you love, you should vote for the one you can live with."

It's not right out in the open.  You wrote "It's official now - Democrats are organizing to vote as Republicans".   Your referred to Democrat Party.  Wrong.  The article you initially referenced as corroboration of your own statement expressly stated that the Democrat party policy was to vote for Obama - precisely the opposite of what you wrote.  You switched and referenced Bill Bigler's article.  But his article did not reference official party policy either.  Now you reference the News editorial - that does not reference official party policy.  Furthermore, your reference of Berman's DetNews editorial - apparently in support of your announcement - indicates that absentee ballot counting does not reveal cross over.  Her comments about cross over are strictly her own - that's what an op-ed is.   It is not official democrat party policy.

Dennis, I do not favor many of the Democrat party policies.  But I oppose misrepresentation, and I believe you have misrepresented official democrat party policy.  You have done so with irrelevant facts, speculation and innuendo.   Not only is your report factually incorrect, but you may be creating anti-social hatred against democrats with your inflammatory rhetoric.  In my opinion, although some hard-core tea party activists may enjoy the division you create, independents - or people who previously voted democrat but are considering republican support - may find your technique to be repulsive. Those are the people we need.  So I request you consider the merits of facts and critical analysis.

The "fact" is that Obama's name is on the Democrat ballot because he didn't remove it.  There are only 2 reasons.  Either Obama intended for his name to be on the ballot, or it was a mistake.  

I replied to Berman in the Detroit News as follows:

Berman is wrong. First Berman's premise is wrong because voting is not the essence of being American. Furthermore, voting does not imply a moral status that can be artificially labelled as "good" or "bad". Today's American's are so divided that agreement on the issue of our essence is not possible. The original American essence was freedom achieved by a revolution against the established government.
Berman is also wrong to argue - essentially - in favor of voting of a cross-over vote for a candidate "whose politics you abhor" because the cross-over is - essentially - a fraud. Americans are provided with many opportunities to cheat, and Americans devise justifications for cheating. Generally, the justification for cheating amounts to the argument that the "ends justify the means". But the prevalence of this attitude has progressively lead this Nation's united States and their People into a caldron of moral chaos.
Berman's so-called "advice" is morally repugnant and neither political party has resolved in support of her misguided notion. The People should vote for the candidate they want to win because that is the right thing to do.

Joe Baublis

The Daily Kos is a leading Liberal-Democrat website. They think the Republican candidate nearest their philosophy, Romney, is the one most likely to win. Here are some excerpts from a Feb. 15 article there:


Daily Kos Staff, Front Page
Announcing Operation Hilarity: Let's keep the GOP clown show going!

It's time for us to take an active role in the GOP nomination process. That's right, it's time for those of us who live in open primary and caucus states—Michigan, North Dakota, Vermont and Tennessee in the next three weeks—to head out and cast a vote for Rick Santorum.

Why would we do such a crazy thing? Lots of great reasons!

Republican turnout has sucked, and appears to be getting worse by the contest. Unlike the 2008 Democratic primaries, which helped President Barack Obama and the Democrats to build a national organization, the GOP is an organizational disaster, with waning voter interest. That means that it takes fewer votes to have an impact than if Republican turnout was maxed out.

Several of the contests have produced razor-thin margins of victory. Rick Santorum won Iowa by 34 votes, Mitt Romney "won" Maine by 194 votes. It won't take many of us to swing contests the way we want them to swing.

The longer this GOP primary drags on, the better the numbers for Team Blue. Not only is President Barack Obama rising in comparison to the clowns in the GOP field, but GOP intensity is down—which would have repercussions all the way down the ballot.


It's a no-brainer! The following states have completely open contests coming up:
2/28: Michigan (Primary)
3/6: North Dakota (caucus)
3/6: Tennessee (primary)
3/6: Vermont  (primary)

If you live in one of those states, pledge to participate in Operation Hilarity by voting or caucusing for Rick Santorum. Click here for Michigan, here for North Dakota, here for Tennessee and here for Vermont.


And if you're squeamish about this, just remember what's at stake—not just the White House, but Nancy Pelosi's gavel and a Senate run by Mitch McConnell. The weaker the GOP standard bearer, the better our chances in November. Rush Limbaugh and his ilk have had no problem meddling in our own contests. And if there's one thing Daily Kos is about, it's about fighting fire with fire.

     So, one might wonder if the Republican State Committee is pleased about choosing a primary instead of a caucus or convention now? Actually, the real influential decision makers are crying all the way to the bank today. When the national presidential campaigns arrive in a state about to hold a primary, who do they look up to be the local experts? It's the established power brokers, those who have the contacts and networks, who can pick up the phone and immediately get just the right person. They are the ones who are paid to be consultants, collect the commissions on million dollar TV ad buys, and get compensated for all the other arrangements that need to be made in a high powered 2-3 week advertising and organizing blitz. They are also the very same people who have the veteran status and experience to influence their allies and cronies on the State Committee, as well as the inexperienced newcomers, on decisions like candidate selection process votes. An idealistic campaign volunteer might say, "Oh, but they wouldn't do that!". Keep on believing, if you like. That only happens in the Democratic party, right?


Some more discussion at Hot Air.
Quote: "Exit question: Why do we have open primaries again, anyway? Is there any reason to believe that the independent voters they attract remain loyal to the party in the general election? "

There is no need to "wonder if the Republican State Committee is pleased" because that group's emotional status is irrelevant.  Whether the group is happy or sad does not matter.   Furthermore, the group cannot judge it's decision because the results have not been determined.  All we have is speculation and gossip, and these are not matters upon which to judge the merits of a decision in retrospect.  In other words, the "I told you so" attitude is pre-mature.  

There is still zero facts in this forum to corroborate the author's claim that the "official" Democrat Party policy is to cross-over.  The only evidence raised thus far is speculation and gossip from - a few individuals - using the news media.  One such news media - Daily Kos - indicates that Rush Limbaugh instigated cross-over voting to effect the Democrat party.  Does Limbaugh represent the "official" Republican Party?   NO!  He represents himself.  Similarly, the news media articles referenced by the primary author of this forum do not represent the "official" Democrat Party.  

I'll respond to Daily Kos and forward a thread to this forum.  I'll also draft an editorial to the Detroit News, and Heritage News on the issue of cross-over.  If the author discovers "facts" then please notify me.  However, if the substance of your claim remains based in speculation then simply add it to the thread.

As such, this forum is limited to a public relations news media issue and does not involve either the Republican or the Democrat Parties.   

Reply to Discussion


© 2018   Created by Liberty Belle.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service