Redstate

Yes, closed primaries!!!!! And not before March. I want to enjoy my holidays uninterrupted.

...the one with Hillary opening up all her Christmas gifts paid for with our taxes. I liked the RedState edited version, though.

Visualizing Hillary in that ad sends a painful muscle spasm up my leg...

I could so get behind starting Presidential campaigns after the snow melts. Then we could spend more time at RedState discussing more important issues to our country's future rather than being hijacked by a ludicrously extended campaign season.

Gack, it's almost six months still to the nominating conventions.

And Rightly So!

n/t

I'm talking about the spoof where somebody changed all the boxes to say .....more realistic..... things that Hill had in mind to "give" us.

Do you remember who put that out? Was it the Republican Party, or one of the campaigners like Romney or McCain? Or Paul Shanklin?

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

When I voted for him, here in Nevada, he was still in the race. It was the most satisfying vote I've cast in a very long time. 28 years to be exact.

We need to kind of bottle that up and shelve it for awhile. But we have GOT to start laying groundwork for a real conservative revival that has an effect in GOP primaries in future elections.

Future plans....future plans....

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

Better candidates.

Yes, I said better. Deal with that. But you're still cool. And so is South Carolina.

absentee

Imagine a veritable army of Fred Thompsons running not only for President, but Senate offices, state legislatures, mayorships, and the like.

It would not only inspire conservatives everywhere, but TEACH people how and why to be conservative. It would inspire a Revolution in governance, and create a generation of Alex Hamiltons, Ben Franklins, Thomas Paines, Nathan Hales, Patrick Henrys, and John Jays.

Glorious. Yes, better candidates indeed. Been saying it myself for years.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

I can only disagree. An army of men armed with good ideas they'll never sell to anyone are exactly as effective as just the one, which is to say not at all. Why wouldn't you want Fred's ideas in a better candidate?

absentee

Why not an Army of Reagans.

Now that would be a political force of extraordinary magnitude.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

An army of Reagans would be too much for this world. All our heads would explode. ... ... Literally.

absentee

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

absentee

your denial changes nothing. He was highly effective in selling his vision -- and OH what a vision -- to a certain significant portion of the electorate. And that appeal was growing, just not fast enough. His approach was unconventional and he made a couple of fatal strategic campaign errors that would never be repeated, and for that he belongs on the trash-heap of electoral history. Mmm-hmmm.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

I saw him in person, his campaign was a disaster and he's responsible for that.

Look man, proof is in the pudding. Here you sit without his vision. Why would you think that multiplying him would change that?

Fred was the ultimate man for the job, but absolutely, demonstrably NOT the ultimate candidate.

absentee

"Fred was the ultimate man for the job, but absolutely, demonstrably NOT the ultimate candidate."

I intended to end that sentence with "for 2008"

absentee

My comment to the pollworker was that I wanted to vote for him while he was still relevant. And you're right, EPU, it felt GREAT! I suspected he wouldn't win or place well in S.C., but I was not in the "viability or bust" mindset then. It was about conscience and belief and principle. Still is, but I have accepted the fact that, in today's bitterly divided political atmosphere, McCain is the guy who can probably cross over more easily and who won't scare the Dems and indies who don't like their own choice of candidate.

And that is a bitter pill to swallow for those of us who really wanted Fred. At this point, the comfort I take daily is watching the media whacking away at Hillary like they whacked away at Fred, Mitt and Giuliani. It's funny as all hell that they are not getting what they want at this point and she's still in it. Like Moe, I'm rooting for major injuries!

FL was a closed primary. If you don't think it was "closed enough" I'd like to here how exactly you would improve the rules. The Supreme Court have rules about what limitations a state can place on primary voters in terms of registration timing and changes - so it's not as if a state can make whatever rules it wants. Many states with closed primaries have some sort of deadline - I think here in NY it's about 30 days before the election - to make changes to registration. I'm not sure that you can extend that number all that much before you run into voting rights violations.

Even if you can require registration earlier, you still can't completely prevent "non-Republicans" from voting. Independents and even Democrats could change registration before the deadline. The concern this year didn't strike me as being about independents "per se" - it was that certain people have a notion of the "right results." They assumed that Republicans wouldn't vote for McCain and so any primary he won must have involved non-Republicans. This led to the very divisive comments about "real" Republicans and the wholesale denigration of anybody who didn't agree with beliefs that "no conservative can vote for McCain."

We have always had open primaries - and most of the time that doesn't change the result. This year we had a lot of candidates which heightened the moderates influence. But McCain wasn't shut out of the Republican vote. Independents put him over the top in some of these states, but get real - he'll need independents to put him over the top in November - so is it really that horrible to allow them a say at the first stage?

I have to check my law, but I believe that the Supreme Court has ruled that the nature of a primary is somewhat subject to the party itself. I seem to recall something whereby the state can't require a party to allow non-members to vote in its primaries. So in most open primary states, it is the state GOP that has acquiesced in the open system.

If you don't like the rules or how they work, go out and change them. Advocate for closed primaries, advocate for a revised primary schedule that would place more closed primary states earlier, do something to make it happen. And if it doesn't, maybe it's because most Republicans don't really want it to happen.

coupla points:
(1) I didn't say FL was not a closed primary. I said they were a purple state.
(2) on people crossing over in closed primaries by cross-registering - even if you put a 30-day or 60-day requirement. Well, sure, but let's don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. It would cut down 80%+ of crossovers, so let's do it.
(3) on 'the nature of a primary is somewhat subject to the party itself' and 'it is the state GOP that has acquiesced in the open system' - well, my diary on closed primaries agrees with you totally. My diary was advocating that the GOP retake control of the GOP nomination process. At no point did I advocate anything regarding the state legislatures or the like. So here I think we're in agreement.
(4) On your last paragraph _I'm doing exactly that. Advocating closed primaries. Along with my advocacy of same on RedState, I am at work in the Texas GOP with the same thing.
(5) on your last sentence, 'maybe it's because most Republicans don't really want it to happen' - I disagree. I think Republicans have acquiesced.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

I'm prone to think that for every person who crosses over to screw around with the opposition, there are 5 or 6 people who cross over because they like so-and-so on the issue of gay marriage, or on NASA, or on Nativities in the Public Square.

Most voters do, in fact, act in good faith when they show up to vote.

Yeah, the ones who game the system are a lot louder than the ones who say stuff like "I voted for McCain because I don't like the Farm Bill" but there are more good and honest voters out there (in either party) than there are Machiavellis.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire