The Price Of Independence -- One Ohio Voter's Story
March 05, 2008 06:00 PM EST
(Updated: April 22, 2008 09:35 AM EDT)
views: 52
|
comments: 33
They say that proof of dedication to an ideology can be shown by pointing to sacrifices made in the name of that belief.
On March 4, 2008, I again paid the price necessary to maintain my status as a registered Independent Ohio voter; by choosing not to vote for any of the running candidates and drawing instead on an Issues Only ballot at my polling place.
The reason for this is as follows; the rules in Ohio dictate that whatever ballot a person votes on in the state's primary, shall define what party affiliation is listed for that voter when the national election rolls around.
If a voter casts a Democratic ballot at the primary, they become registered as a Democrat and their vote in November is recorded as having been cast by a Democrat. If a voter selects a Republican ballot during the primary, then they become registered as a Republican, and their vote in November is recorded as having been cast by a Republican.
I am an Independent; and I always want to be registered as an Independent.
In Ohio, every voter can choose whichever ballot they want; regardless of their actual party affiliation. Ohio voters can choose to vote a ballot for whichever, or neither, party.
I am a registered voter.
I could have asked for a Republican ballot.
I could have asked for a Democratic ballot.
I asked for an Issues Only ballot.
Once upon a time, I believed that I was limited to Issues Only ballots because I did not care to declare allegiance to any political party (Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, etc.). I'm not much of a joiner. I'm very Independent.
I did not know that I could vote for either party's presidential nominees in the primary; and I didn't care. It seemed eminently fair to me that actual and involved party members should be the ones who select the person that is going to best represents their party.
Then came 43.
This year, I learned that some states allow their Independent voters to exercise a vote in the party's primaries. I see it as an unreachable carrot for me here in Ohio. I am not willing to sacrifice my status as a registered Independent in order to cast such a vote.
So, after sliding my little data card into the Diebold machine and pressing "NEXT==>" three tax levies and not one single candidate were offered up for my selecting.
I made my choices (voting YES for two school levies, and YES to one senior citizen levy), checked that my paper trail was properly recorded, then pulled the little card out, turned it in and collected my lapel sticker.
I could have given a vote to one of the candidates today, but I didn't.
...because I'm adamant about being an Independent.
--
05 March 2008
--
Bill's Spirit is an Artist, Writer, Poet, Philosopher currently wordsmithing from a humble digital forge in small town Ohio.
The works of the man behind Bill's Spirit have been published in small alternative and amateur presses since 1986. Before that, they just filled notebooks, decorated walls and gathered dust in piles and boxes.
--
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the
Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 33
If you can vote for anyone, then I would like to know how many Republicans voted for Hillary Clinton to skew the vote and keep the fight going in order to hurt the Democratic party.
Can a "declared/registred" Republican who votes Democratic in the primary then vote Republican in the General?
(P.S. Good for you.)
Nobody in Michigan or Florida (or anywhere else) will ever stop you from voting any way you want. You know this already.............but nice red herring!
I overheard a few people at the polls who were registered Republicans decide to vote Democrat in the primary for that very reason.However, when they vote Republican in November, it will be recorded as a Democrat voting for a Republican.
Bill,
Way to go, Hon....stand up for your beliefs.
Kathryn Esplin-Oleski - Yes, it will be interesting to see how that plays out.
I too would like to know how many party adherents cross over during Ohio's primary to vote for someone in the other party. It is absolutely certain that there are some who try to effect their opposition party's positions.
The answer to your question is; Yes. A "declared/registred" Republican can vote Democratic in the primary and then vote Republican in the general election; and vice versa.
(Thanks!)
Bret W. - What Spartan is referring to is that Republican Governors and Republican dominated state legislators were the motivating force behind Michigan and Florida's moving their primary dates; which resulted in the Democrats choosing to exclude those states delegates from the upcoming DNC.
Donna F. - Thanks, sweetums.
So if Republicans were behind the move of Democratic primaries, weren't they smart enough to see that it would incur the wrath of the party? I don't buy it.
I'm a part of the Illinois Democratic party, and if we ever have any "clarification" issues, we simply call the DNC and ask what will happen if we do something 'out of the ordinary'. If the Democratic party heads in Michigan and/or Florida didn't do this, then they're stupider than I thought.............and I already had a pretty low opinion of both, from dealing with them in the past.
Like hell you are, you're a Bushco tool, Period.
It's going to take me a while to figure out all the tricks and tracks that are being played during elections. Not what the politicians are saying/doing, but just about how we vote, count that vote, manage that vote, track that vote....(sigh.) Can't we just go to one person / one vote? Please? With universal rules for all parties? Or would that be a bad thing? I've heard discussions about the "all or nothing" repubs, and the Dems love dialog and debate--what do you guys think?
Blessed peace on all your patriotic spirits.
Wilka
Ron & Buddy - Thanks for commenting.
I can't put my finger on it, but it seems I read or heard somewhere that money is allocated to individual state parties according to the number of registered voters tallied during national elections.
Thanks for the blessings. Back at ya. :-)
I will admit, I scratch my head wondering why the national Democratic party chose to ignore those state's delegates. Are they saying that they expected Michigan and Florida Democrats to try and force their states to split their primaries up and let only the Republican primaries be moved up while the Democratic primary would remain on its original date? That would seem an unrealistic idea. Election boards in such large states would have doubled their costs if they had to put on two primaries.
I am curious if Illinois, like Ohio, records the voters registered party preference according to the vote cast, or if they allow people to designate their party affiliation separate from the vote they cast. In other words; are there any "registered" Independents in Illinois?
As for who I prefer in the general, I will be waiting to see who the candidates are. Now that Mike Huckabee has withdrawn, I will say that it is totally unlikely I will vote for any of the Republican candidates.
Thanks for commenting. :-)
There are no registered Independents in Illinois. They are forced to wait for the general election. They are frozen out of the primaries because they must declare themselves.
First off, just ignore nimrods like Ron W.
They're Left Wing crackpots from the moment they were hatched. Ron is a particularly virulent strain of this spawn.
Also, Ron is upset that he can't purge everyone who isn't a closet Communist, like himself. He won't be happy until the marginal tax rate in this country is 100%, and government runs every aspect of your life.
It would seem to me that a huge stink could be made in Illinois over the fact that Illinois Indpendents are locked out during the primary. After all, aren't there bipartisan issues (like local tax levies) to be voted on?
Ron & Buddy provide information that they think is important, and they back it up with citations, links and logic. Whereas you are dismissive, disrespectful and condescending with your name calling and label laying; and not full of factual evidence or examples.
I much easier tolerate the company of a left-wing crackpot, than the company of a condescending, closed-minded totalitarian.
Ron does almost no neutral sourcing, and his facts are rarely backed up. That's why its so easy to make him look like a fool, by just using simple logic.
Don't hitch your wagon to such a way-out Leftist.
Have Ron & Buddy tell you how they fought tooth and nail to "prove" that Bill Clinton absolutely, positively was NOT impeached. It was laughable.
I tend to drive my own wagon and not hitch it to others' wagons.
Impeachment is a clouded issue for just about everyone (whether you are talking about Clinton, Nixon, or any other U.S. President). Most assume that if a president has been impeached that they were removed from office, but that is not the case.
Thomas Spainhour - Thanks for commenting. Let me invite you to become an Independent, and join the party-less, totally not organized voting contingent.
Agreed - we should read and absorb all sides of an issue. I think Ron does that. However, when he writes an article, or comments on a topic, he only presents the extreme Left Wing viewpoint...............then he tries to sell it to everyone on Gather as though it is the only logical and reasonable viewpoint. I've pointed this out to him in the past, and he resents it greatly. In fact, he gets downright belligerent when I take the time to neutrally source a rebuttal to his Leftist point of view. If you pursue him and ask for his sources, they almost always turn out to be the views of one whacko Leftist writer at HuffyPost - David Sirota.
Now that doesn't sound too well rounded, does it?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impeachment isn't that tough to understand, especially when you link Ron to the definition of it, numerous times. Its simply charging a public official with misconduct while in office. However, Ron wouldn't buy that. He thought it was something else. Finally, I had him Google "Was Clinton Impeached?"
The answer was obvious, but he continued arguing an untenable position. That's when I realized Ron is a kook.
Some have argued that this rule exists so that only party members would be able to vote for their respective party's representative (an argument that does sound valid to my ears), but a goal which Ohio's procedures do not really safeguard. Voters can be Republican or Democratic adherents and cast their ballot on opposing party primary tickets, so long as they do not care what their "officially recorded" affiliation is.
So, the way things are done here really only leaves me, and others like me (people who care what their recorded affiliation is), outside the primary selection process; which feels kind of disenfranchising. Independent voters like myself are supposed to just sit and twiddle our thumbs on the sidelines while the Democrats and Republicans decide who I will be able to voter for in November's general.