Allahpundit asks, incredulously.
Under such a standard, can Kos be prosecuted for incitement to vote fraud?
Related, Volokh post on prosecution for fraudulently claiming to be Medal of Honor recipient The counter-argument to Volokh, who holds this is probably constitutional:
“If the government cannot under the First Amendment compel reverence when it comes to our nation’s highest symbol [the flag],†asked Ronald K. L. Collins, a scholar at the First Amendment Center in Washington, “why then can it compel reverence when it comes to lesser forms of symbolic expression?â€Â ÂÂ
You mean, like party affiliation, or fraudulently pretending to be a lawyer?
Great Comment Spam:
Gel Better Sex Essentials Gel Lubricant on Dems 2008: The “Ferraro flap”
Ewwww.
“Under such a standard, can Kos be prosecuted for incitement to vote fraud?”
First it would depend on whether cross party voting in Michigan is fraud. The issue in Ohio is that its not a purely open primary — to switch parties last minute you have to swear or affirm that you support your new party. This is presumably to prevent exactly what Kos and Limbaugh were promoting. It may be possible to show some people were lying. I recall seeing some blog post that linked to commenters on a blog discussing having lied in order to vote.
And then it would depend on crossing the high first amendment bars to prosecution for incitement.
How about lying to get elected, then?
Maybe the defendants should claim they only crossed over in the primary because of sex. If it was all about sex, the perjury, and/or suborning of same, doesn’t matter.
Or so I hear, from somewhere out at sea, off to port…
For how long do you have to “support your new party” – forever? For the current election season? For the next week? Too much wiggle room, too un-enforcable, and too anti-First Amendment if you ask me.
How about facilitating lying to vote by opposing the need for positive ID at the polls?
So much for the secret ballot. What, are they going to try and go find out these people’s votes in the general election.
I was told that if George Bush was re-elected President, people would face legal repercussions for voting, and THEY WERE RIGHT!
(hattip: Instapundit)
Shoot, maybe we should just prosecute people for not registering to vote and/or for not voting. Make it mandatory, and take away their house if they don’t!
The next step, KC Jim, is to prosecute them for not voting rightly. Make it mandatory not just to vote, but to vote for Dear Leader. Only way to prove that 100% mandate from the masses, ya know.
Indeed. And then we could have Jimmah Carter comment favorably on our elections and stuff. And get us some sweet, sweet mandates! Utopia!
“So much for the secret ballot. ”
Who you voted for is still secret. The fact that you voted, or have a particular party registration, is not.
“For how long do you have to “support your new party†– forever? For the current election season? For the next week? Too much wiggle room, too un-enforcable, and too anti-First Amendment if you ask me.”
Swearing that you support the principles of your new party doesn’t mean that you can’t later change your mind. But it does mean that you at that time supported the party.
This explains more — and includes a confession:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/did-ohio-crosso.html
“Ohio’s revised election code includes an election falsification clause (Revised Code 3513.20), which says that if a voter who changes parties is challenged by poll workers as to the sincerity of his change of heart and also signs an affidavit stating that he supports the principles of the party to which he’s changing — when in fact he doesn’t support them — then he would be committing election falsification.”
Overall it seems like a good midway between having a closed primary and an open primary — with a caveat. The caveat is if this rule only applies to ‘last-minute’ at the poll registration changes, like the kind you can’t normally do in a closed primary.
Overall it seems like a steaming pile of crap, actually.
Overall it seems like a steaming pile of crap, actually.
Perfect assessment. This is very funny because actual voter fraud, which harms the process, is defended and engaged by Democrats (as done in Wisconsin, Missouri, Washington state, Illinois), while this insignificant business is assailed as republic-destroying.
what the? how random is that?
poll worker: hey, I just saw you climb out of that pick-up with the NASCAR sticker. are you sure you want to vote in the Democratic primary?
voter: um, yes.
poll worker: please sign this statement swearing your loyalty to the party.
where does that put Kucinich? you know he wasn’t on the ballot here in Texas because he wouldn’t sign a promise to support the eventual Democratic candidate?
Texas is different, maggie. Here, you just tell ’em and they hand you the paper.
Remember it’s less than a generation since anybody asking for a Republican ballot would almost certainly have to wait while the people at the courthouse found one and sent it out via sheriff’s deputy. (Who would probably tell the local newspaper, and the next day’s headline would’ve been REPUBLICAN VOTE IN COLLIN COUNTY! WORLD ENDS TOMORROW!)
Regards,
Ric
Forget aboput whether or not any body will be prosecuted on that thin bowl of gruel (they won’t.) I’m having a very Hitler Youth/Apparatchik moment when I hear that I have to sign a “loyalty pledge.”
I’ll support the Republican Party but I ain’t signing anything that makes me legally liable if I dissent from party decisions. Fortunatly, PA requires no such document, which means I’m never living in Ohio.
BJTexas — I don’t believe the Republicans require any such thing in Ohio. Granted, I didn’t vote in the primary (seemed a moot point, anyway), but I’ve never heard of any such thing.
Thank god for that Rob. I felt like I was going to have to drink heavily to erase the partyy loyalty heebie-jeebies this story has given me.
Only the Dems require the “loyalty” sIgning? I’m shocked! (/sarcasm)
fuckin’ thought Nazi’s
Of course dead people voting in Illinois? Not nearly as eggregious.
FLYING PINK DIK DIKS FOR ALL!!!
“REPUBLICAN VOTE IN COLLIN COUNTY! WORLD ENDS TOMORROW!”
WOMEN, MINORITIES HARDEST HIT
[fixed]
Well, like I’ve said, I’ve not voted in a primary. It may be required for both parties, and I wouldn’t know.
However, it would be an interesting wrinkle if it *did* turn out to be a Donk only requirement.
I just wonder how this thing is enforceable, if it’s true as darlas helpfully concedes that it “doesn’t mean that you can’t later change your mind.” If I vote one way today, who’s to say I didn’t go home immediately afterward, get a quick online education, and change my mind by morning?
Huh. In the Wisconsin primary, they handed everyone the same ballot with both parties’ candidates and reminded us we could only check one name.
I’m pretty sure the dead and I.P. Freeley weren’t voting for McCain.
It wasn’t like this in all OH counties either. I just told them what I was registered as and got a ballot. (I pretended to be both dumb and excited to vote for Hillary, that was probably enough.)
Honestly, I don’t think I’m a registered republican (I’m not sure why I would have ever registered for either party, but I know damn well I’ve never registered as a democrat…Ok, well since graduating college) and have always been independent. The poll workers always just ask me if I want a republican/democrat/issues ballot when I come to check in. That’s it. In the primaries I usually just say issues. This primary, though, I said, “what the hell, gimme a democrat ballot”. They poll worker just smiled and said “we’re hearing that a lot today”. I voted for whoever was running against CooCoocinich. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Cuyahoga County residents are brain addled dumb fucks. He’s still our congresscritter.
This sort of thing always confuses the Hell out of Europeans, and contributes a lot to cross-pond misunderstanding.
To a very close approximation, we don’t have “Parties” in the sense a European used to parliamentary forms expects to see. In most countries in the world, you do “join” a party in the same sense you join a club or other association; there are dues, loyalty oaths, and party duties, and changing parties is a big deal — it’s a contractural arrangement.
“Republican” and “Democrat” are really just labels we can adopt, largely as declarations of basic philosophy. Some people, Democrats especially, really really wish that we were more European in that respect, and my understanding is that several States try to go along with that. I don’t think it’s enforceable in any real way.
Regards,
Ric
darlas: Overall it seems like a good midway between having a closed primary and an open primary
To me it sounds like thought crime legislation.
Oh, well, then — an essential part of the Democrat party platform, then.
ha, hadn’t thought of that. it explains a lot really.
“I just wonder how this thing is enforceable, if it’s true as darlas helpfully concedes that it “doesn’t mean that you can’t later change your mind
One way it is enforceable is if people confess to actually lying. Which is quite different than changing your mind.
“To me it sounds like thought crime legislation.”
Do you prefer open or closed primaries?
closed, but there are MUCH better ways to do it. and I’m curious just how you would make one confess to lying about something like this.
“The comfy chair!!!”
…or maybe, electionboarding…?
“This sort of thing always confuses the Hell out of Europeans, and contributes a lot to cross-pond misunderstanding.”
Tain’t just Europeans; remember how Patton caused an uproar at the end of WWII when he said that joining the Nazi Party wasn’t any different than saying you were a Democrat or Republican? I suspect Georgie had the same confusion….
[…] Interestingly enough, Michigan had a closed primary this time around, and I seem to recall Kos promoting the idea that Dems ought to cross party lines to vote Republican. I bring this up once again, because as before it presents very interesting questions regarding privacy and First Amendment principles. […]