Should Republicans vote in Democratic primaries?

[AgadorSparticus]

I'm asking this because record numbers of republicans voted in the Wisconsin democratic primary. I'm a bit concerned that it will compromise the integrity of the election and alter the true voice of democrats in that state. What does everyone think about this?

[sallyseven]

1. They do it because it is allowed in some states.

They either are trying skew the results, are not sure about bush or just stupid.

[Maddy McCall]

10. Or maybe they want to participate legally in the democratic process of

voting. I see nothing wrong with that in OPEN primaries. I always vote in the Republican primary during open primaries when my party is in power. It has been done for tens of decades.

[jpgpenn]

2. HELL NO!

[fizzana]

3. It's called the "Democratic Primary" for a reason.

n/t

[Burma Jones]

4. I believe in open primaries

In 2000, I was living in Virginia, an open primary state, and was able to cast a vote for John McCain because, though a Democrat, I thought it very important that somebody like Bush* not even be allowed to run. McCain was also a viable alternative since he had not been so completely smeared by the BFCC and was still in the running

If there are Republicans that are voting to sway the Democratic Party towards a less viable candidate, I don't think they can make much of a difference. I mean, what are they going to do, all vote for LaRouche?

[BL_Zebub]

5. I suspect the Kerry supporters will all vote "yes" on this one?

Since they had a lot of help from Republicans so far. Believe me, most of the 'Pukes I know were originally going to vote for Sharpton, but then they realized that would be far too suspicious. So instead, they chose the "establishment" candidate most likely to lose to Bush in the GE.

The sad thing is all the bandwagon Demoncrats who bought into it. :evilfrown:

[boxster]

8. Uh, no.

Republicans voted overwhelmingly for Edwards and Dean in WI, not Kerry.

[Maddy McCall]

6. Should Democrats vote in Republican primaries? I always have...

Mississippi has open primaries. When your party is in power and your incumbent is assured to go to the GE, you vote in the opposing party's primary.

We vote in theirs, they vote in ours. This isn't a first and it doesn't tremendously affect the outcome.

[boxster]

7. I guess I don't understand why they're even included.

If it's a Democratic primary, my opinion would be to include Democrats and *maybe* Independents.

But why Republicans are allowed to vote in a Democratic primary - a process in which the Democratic Party is supposedly choosing its nominee, is beyond me.

[einniv]

13. And how would you determine who is a dem and who a repub?

Do you have to be a paying memeber of some organization?
Are you ever allowed to change your mind and switch parties?

[boxster]

20. Ever heard of closed primaries?

Require voter registration by party. Allow only registered party voters to vote in the primary.

Already in place in many states.

[THUNDER HANDS]

9. no

I don't even want Independents voting in the primaries. If you're not going to register with a party you have no business voting to choose that party's nominee.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. HELL NO!

BUT, my sister, who's a Democrat, does vote in republican primaries and votes AGAINST the candidate they want. :7

[jansu]

12. That's letting two sharks and a pig......

vote on what's for dinner! This is for Democrats to choose the candidate they want as President, not who the Republicans want to run against!

[geniph]

14. That's why we switched back to 100% caucuses

you have to sign a form stating that you are a registered Democrat to participate in a precinct caucus. Washington state eliminated the primary altogether. The party hierarchy hated our open primary, because of just that reason.

While I've often crossed party lines, particularly in a primary, it's not been for nefarious reasons; it's been because I had some genuine reason for thinking that non-Democratic candidate was best for that office at that time.

It's been years since I've crossed party lines, though - seems like there's no such thing as a moderate Republican anymore. They're all made to toe the far-right neocon party line or they're hounded out of office.

[For PaisAn]

15. NO!

They should not be allowed to.

[Taeger]

16. The problem is ...

The problem is that presidential primaries and local primaries can be held on different dates.

If Republicans want to register as Democrats, that's fine as long as they loose their ability to choose among local and state Republican candidates.

[movonne]

17. NO!!!!!

[mac2]

18. It's really stupid to include Republicans in our decisions.

What planet are you from?

[kurtyboy]

19. Unlawful, according to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Out here on the West Coast, we cannot hold "open" or blanket primaries any longer. The Courts ruled them illegal for California, and appeals by other states were not successful.

Here in Washington state, our primaries have been thrown into turmoil as the Legislature tries to craft a solution. A likely proposal has the top-two vote getters advancing to the General, regardless of party affiliation. Another proposal has voters requesting separate ballots (GOP, DEM, or IND)--but trust me, we will never have de jure registration by party affiliation out here.

Finally, if our legislature fails to act, then there will be no primary at all, and our general election will have EVERY filed candidate for EVERY office on the ballot. If this occurs, I can foresee a ballot that runs 25 or 30 pages in length.

[genius]

21. I don't trust Republicans.

I'm not advocating taking them all out behind the Registrar of Voters and shooting them but I probably wouldn't complain if someone did.