Washblog || February Presidential Primary? Nah.

February Presidential Primary? Nah.

By m3047
Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 11:41:50 AM PST
Section: Diary Topic: Alternative and Community Media

As much as I care about election integrity, and indeed because I do care about election integrity: I'm not going to work this election. If possible, I will sign in but not vote a partisan ballot.

I've worked the polls for several years. I even served as the 36th Legislative Districts Democratic Party pollworker coordinator the year before last.

Why I'm not working:

This poll is not binding on the Democratic Party, who will choose and apportion their nominating delegates by the caucus system. Just like the monorail [that should be viaduct -- FWM] poll, this is nothing but a popularity contest and in my opinion as such dilutes and deprecates the elections process. On top of all of the other insults to the process (amply chronicled here and elsewhere), I don't see participating as a positive contribution; maybe they can hold it entirely by mail like they did with the monorail.

Why I'm not voting a partisan ballot:

Same reason. I want to be recorded as having taken the time to show up, if that's possible; but I am not going endorse this process.

Why would the Democratic Party bother?

Because they want the list of names.

"Oh, pooh pooh, we don't have Party registration in Washington State!" Ah, yes we do... if you run for PCO or attend a caucus. Yeppers, gotta publicly align with a Party to do either of those things.

"But that's not part of voting. (with a solemn, tremolous voice:) You're being misleading and doing a public disservice!"

This is from the Secretary of State's Presidential Primary FAQ:

Q: Can I participate in both the primary and a caucus?
Voters can participate in both the party caucuses and the Presidential Primary so long as they participate on behalf of the same party.
Both major parties plan to hold their caucuses on Saturday, February 9, 2008, ten days before the primary. The parties will in vite the voters to participate in the caucuses and will require participants to sign an oath declaring their party affiliation.
Voters participating in the Presidential Primary will be asked to sign an oath submitted by the political parties indicating that the voter has not participated in the other party's caucus process. Each party will receive a list of voters who chose to affiliate with that party in the primary. (emphasis mine)

If you're going to choose a time to boycott an election to protest how they're being managed, this seems like the one: the Parties aren't interested in taking elections as seriously as getting elected and they're the only ones with skin in this game.

< Great Darcy Burner fundraiser in Fife on Monday | Town Hall With Adam Smith >

Poll

Votes: 10
Results	\|	Other Polls

February Presidential Primary? Nah. | 11 comments (11 topical)

Chuck Your Rock In The Works, OR

Be Another Brick In The Wall?

I have to do something Positive to stop these fascist bastards, and the most effective positive thing I can think of doing is

DO NOT HELP THE SPINELESS PAID DEMS.

I'm considering Fred's idea - what the hell has this incompetent party done, other than scare us that if we don't re-eleet cant-sell-us-out-fast-enough

there'd be no brake on gitmo, there'd be no brake on the fascists and their destroying the government, the budget, the community

so what kind of F#$%ING lies is dwight and company gonna come up with this time around?

I know the evil, lying, despicable fascists are evil despicalbe liars. I've been it hearing from elected Dems for decades, ya know,

just in case I was too freaking stupid or too freaking clueless to notice myself.

Judith Hine stood up at a 36th District meeting in 2004 with a CD in her hand and said how there were ... 6? 7? thousand names of registered voters on that disk!

(thanks electable kerry and pasty gephardt and ... snooze ... who else ? NOT named "Howard Dean" for all those names ... NOT)

and what great things have the dem party done in the last 4 years with all those names ... pimp them for money? pimp them for volunteers to go shag down more money?

It is customary out here in the pacified northwest to preface the above statement with 'pardon me for being busy with my job... but ...'

but I am NOT going to say 'pardon me...'

ANYONE who wants to blame me for what the paid dems have NOT done can kiss my ass.

why are we collecting names in feb? so nancy worthless and harry even more worthless and those slimeballs at the dscc and dccc can have more names?

ugh.

rmm.

http://www.liemail.com/BambooGrassroots.html

by rmdSeaBos on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 04:59:34 PM PST

* 1 none 0 *

spaniard in the works, thx no thx n/t by m3047, 12/10/2007 01:50:06 AM PST (none / 0)

I still see the value.

In general, I believe I am observing that the real political power in the Democratic party -- grassroots commitment to effect change -- is being given inadequate respect by the state leadership and, instead, the people who make up this "grassroots" -- are being understood as "robocalls on legs" (people simply to do doorbelling) -- and ATMs for donations.

I don't think it's rooted in cynicism -- I think it's a management style and decision based on what the leadership feels will get the best electoral results. I believe it's a massive mistake.

Regarding the caucuses, however, I do plan to take part. In fact, I've agreed to serve as a caucus area coordinator. This neighborhood level, where people interact face-to-face and share information -- is where it's at.

by noemie maxwell on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 01:56:10 PM PST

* 2 none 0 *

Caucuses, yes

Running my caucus is one of my obligations as a PCO, as a matter of fact; I will be encouraging my neighbors to attend... even as I cast a mordant note in the direction of the so-called presidential primary. (And if people want to furnish more than their name and voting address at the caucus, they'll do that fully informed.)

Ironically working elections, as well as voting in them, is optional; and it's a cryin' shame the Parties don't care as much about the conduct of elections as they do about getting elected.

by m3047 on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 04:41:06 PM PST

* 3 none 0 *

Washington Caucuses could actually matter

If it's still undetermined after Super/Stupid tuseday on Feb. 5th, Washington's 99 delegates might be a real factor. Every remaining viable candidate is going to fly into Seattle from California. If nothing else, they and thier entourages could be a incomic boost.

I've been to three party caucus traingings this year. And I am pleasantly surprised. For the first time in my memory, the WSDCC seems to have it's act together for this cycle. Anyone who is running a caucus, or area coordinating should try to get in on a training session. Hopefully some went to the one scheduled before the recent Holiday party.

Separately, it seems I'm losing this poll, Oh Well. :)

Dave Gibney Pullman

by gibney on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 01:11:41 PM PST

* 4 none 0 *

Well, It's The Party's Fault...

...for opening up the question of whether the primary is worthwhile at all.

Obviously there is no particular reason to vote in the primary if it doesn't really matter for the process - although it may represent an interesting addition to the caucus just in terms of numbers.

As for this objection to party registration, I would hope that Washingtonians are already a little embarrassed at having to have the Federal appealate courts explain TWICE the concept of a political party's First Amnendment right to poll its members. Californians only had to have it explained to them once. Surely, there does not need to be a third explanation.

Moreover, Washington state's pigheadedness on this issue has allowed the very back-room and/or non-voter system that M3407 and others rightly object to.

The answer is to have an early, pick-a-party primary. Why shouldn't Washington join other small states in being a January primary?

by dlaw on Wed Dec 19, 2007 at 02:11:47 PM PST

<DIV class="box