I’m a Democrat that lives in Georgia.
If I want to vote for Obama in November, Do I need to do anything today in regards to heading to my polling place?
Is there any validity in going to the polls, and voting for the easiest* opponent for Obama to beat?
*In the generic sense. I’m sure half of the other threads in the Elections section will cover the debate here.
I voted for Santorum in Michigan last week for just that reason and to rub the metaphorical turd in Romney’s face. It didn’t work out so well and I wanted to hand in my ballot using tongs and rubber gloves, but I’m glad to have two chances to vote against Romney this year.
It depends whether or not VA has an open primary. It should be noted that Gingrich and Santorum are not on the ballot in VA so you are limited to Romney or Paul and that Romney has a huge lead in the polls.
There are probably other races on the ballot. I’m a Democrat in Ohio, and voted in the primary this morning. Obama was unopposed, as was US Senator Sherrod Brown. But there were numerous local offices on the ballot as well. Unfortunately, since I live in a very Republican area, there were no Democrats to vote for at all in many of those races, but there were one or two which were actually being contested. Bottom line – yes, go to the polls even if you’re a Democrat and don’t think Obama needs your support. There may be other issues.
I went to vote this morning and there was only once race on the Democratic ballot: “Obama” vs. “Uncommitted”. Since that seemed like a waste of time, I took a Republican ballot.
Now, I could have voted for Santorum as a poke in the eye to Romney. But Santorum is already expected to win this state easily. I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Romney. So I finally just marked my ballot for Huntsman, who I always considered the most palatable of the candidates even though he’s been out of the race for two months.
What a waste of time! At least I was early enough to the polls that it only took a few minutes.
Virginia is in Georgia?
Dammit. Sorry about that.
I know one state’s Democratic organization (Ohio maybe) is exhorting Democrats to vote for Obama to give him more votes in an uncontested primary than any Republican can get in their contest.
That’s OK, you just had Georgia on your mind.
The Democratic caucus in Colorado is tonight. The party is urging people to turn out, I assume as a way to begin getting the extremely politically active ready for the general election.
As much as I like the idea of messing with the Republican primaries (and if the rules allow it, feel free), I wonder if the entire primary process needs to be rethought after this election. It’s pretty clear candidates are gaming the system not because they have a chance to win but because remaining “viable” burnishes their own political celebrity (soon to be parlayed into a Fox news talk show). Plus, I think party leadership is regretting the way rich donors now use superPACs to essentially bypass them in the process. Not that there’s necessarily anything wrong with that, but you can bet they have an incentive to rewrite the rules such that it makes them more relevant.
If we’re assuming hypothetically that you’re a Dem voting strategically in an open GOP primary, I’d say vote for the one trailing, just to help keep the fight going. Paul, right now, I believe. OTOH, one might make a case to vote for Gingrich as most-likely-to-fight-it-out-on-the-Convention-floor.