Would you consider crossing over to vote for Bill Weld in the Republican primary?

[AdamGG]

This might seem like a weird thread topic, but I live in Massachusetts, which is an open primary state. In 2000, I crossed over and voted for John McCain over Dumbya in the Republican primary because I liked both Al Gore and Bill Bradley, but Bush was obviously horrendous. Lots of other people did this, which caused McCain to finish with like 74% of the vote in the Mass. primary. There was no question that I was going to vote for the Democratic nominee in November.

When the primary comes, if I feel equally good about Kamala/Pete/Klobuchar/Warren, etc., and if Bill Weld is polling decently going into the primary (he was a popular 2 term governor here), there's a chance that I may feel like my primary vote is more useful giving a black eye to Trump.

[FM123]

1. Never.

But as I said before, I would love to see him run as an independent so that he can split off some repug votes to help us Dems. I want him to Stein & Nader the GOP.

[ornotna]

2. Nope. n/t

[GP6971]

3. Not a chance. n/t

[Laurelin]

4. Yes

I like all the democratic candidates, so I'm not so worried about who wins. But Trump has to go.

[AdamGG]

8. Exactly what I meant

I may not cross over and do this, but it's definitely a possibility. ONLY for the primary.

[Jim_Pridx]

25. In the past I've only voted in such a manner......

.....if it absolutely benefits the left with no negative repercussions after the fact. Sometimes the cards fall as they will, so why not?

[moonscape]

36. I did this once ...

changed party affiliation so to vote against Reagan in the primary, then switched right back to Dem. Reagan was an unimaginable horror to me. Little did I know what was in store ...

[lastlib]

16. I might even donate to Bill Weld if it would weaken AnusMouth.

(not much, I wouldn't want him to think I would actually support a GOPher.)

[marble falls]

5. Not a fucking chance in Hell. I don't care for either of them and neither of them scare me ...

this cross over thing is exactly what they've tried to do to us in a bunch of Congressional elections over the years.

We can not allow ourselves to be drawn into cynical political win at any cost, by any means shenanigans. Not playing those games and being not identified with them is why we had record turnouts and got the House back conclusively last November.

[AdamGG]

15. I don't consider it a "shenanigan"

I like having the option to vote in either primary and use my vote to help put out the biggest fire. In 2000, to me, trying to eliminate Bush was far more important than whether the Democratic nominee was Gore or Bradley (especially since it was obviously going to be Gore no matter what I did).

Historically, it has had a BIG effect when an incumbent President loses a primary. Lyndon Johnson getting roughed up by Eugene McCarthy, Ford getting challenged by Reagan, Carter and Ted Kennedy, Bush, Sr. and Pat Buchanan - Teddy Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. If Weld gets any traction and publicity on the stump attacking Trump, it will further weaken him for the general election. That won't just affect whether Trump wins or loses, but possibly the margin by which he loses, and the down ballot coattails the Democrats could have to win state legislatures and undo gerrymandering.

When the primary comes, a year from now, I may not cross over. But, if I like a number of the Democratic candidates equally and I see that Weld is polling in the 40's in my state and I could help put him over the top and have Fox and everyone airing his criticisms of Trump before the general election even starts, it might be hard to resist.

[marble falls]

17. There's a fair amount of rationalization in that. Voting in a primarey for a candiate and a party ..

you have no intention in hell of supporting is a shenanigan, its a win at any cost subverting the right to vote into a win at any cost gambit.

How about Republicans primarying say Sen Manchin over say Hilary Clinton by crossing party lines, because they want to MAGA? Neither they nor you are breaking any laws but does that make it the right or a good thing to do?

[AdamGG]

21. I understand your point, but I do think that Weld is infinitely better than Trump

So, I don't consider it just a throw a wrench into their machine gambit. The marginal value of my vote used between something that is 1 million times bad vs. 100 times bad is higher than using it between two choices that I view as 100 times good vs. 90 times good.

The first time I voted in a Republican primary was when Bill Weld ran for Governor the first time. We'd slipped into a recession and after the way he lost to Bush, Sr., Dukakis had become unpopular. It was obvious that the Republicans might win the governorship, but the choice was between moderate, pro-choice, pro gay rights Bill Weld and a Christian conservative (Steven Pierce) for the Republican nomination. I was glad to have the opportunity to make that choice.

Also, although the Republican party has become a complete cesspool, in theory, I'd rather that our system not be such a duopoly, so when I feel the circumstances merit it, I also feel like I'm using my vote to broaden the playing field. I'm not just doing it to gum up the works for Republicans in general, I'm casting an extra vote against a person who I think is a uniquely horrible choice.

[Iggo]

6. Never.

[mulsh]

7. no

[ancianita]

9. Never occurred to me.

[LAS14]

10. Depends on where the Dems are. If someone I especially like is neck and neck...

... with someone I'm not so fond of, I'll vote for the Democrat. But I heard a good argument on radio this a.m. about Weld possibly raising Repub consciousness enough to cause some to abandon Trump in the general. If the Dem primary in Mass (me too) isn't critical, I think I might.

[GulfCoast66]

11. Never. And thankfully Florida has closed primaries.

Only members of the Democratic Party will decide our candidate here.

[Lucid Dreamer]

22. Not exactly true. Only REGISTERED Democrats may vote for Dems...

...and anybody can register to vote for either party. This has nothing to do with party membership.
________________________________________________________

Florida is a closed primary state. If you wish to vote in a partisan primary election, you must be a registered voter in the party for which the primary is being held.

Party changes must be made by the end of the 29th day before the primary election. For a general election, a party change can be made at any time. A party change must be made in writing, use the Florida Voter Registration Application to change your party affiliation.

https://www.flaglerelections.com/Voter-Outreach/Closed-Primary-Elections

[CaptainTruth]

12. No, because I believe it would be counter-productive & would help Republicans.

Trump hasn't expanded his base, he has his 36-38% cult & that's it, & I don't believe he can win the general election with that.

If Trump loses the primary to someone relatively sane (& everyone is relatively sane compared to Trump) a whole bunch of "Never Trump" Republicans are going to flock back to their party & vote Republican instead of sitting it out & not voting, or even crossing the line & voting for a Democrat.

I'm other words, I believe Democrats (any Democrat) stands a much better chance of winning against Trump than against Weld.

[AdamGG]

24. I don't think there's a chance of Weld becoming the nominee, though

It would be more about the black eye Trump would receive if some of the primaries were competitive and he had to spend more time defending his abominable record, rather than just attacking the Democrats.

[area51]

13. No.

I really want my candidate to get as many votes as possible.

[pnwmom]

14. I am especially grateful to Weld because this means fewer R's will be tempted to cross over

into our open primaries. Instead, they are more likely than before to be either supporting or fighting Trump in their own.

[spooky3]

27. A good point. Also, if Weld gains steam, Repubs will have to spend more time and money on the

primaries and have less for the general.

[TeamPooka]

18. This is a Democratic website. We don't support Republicans.

[dogman]

19. I live in a state where this is simple also (IL) but for one issue.

If you pull an R ballot there is a record. You might start getting gop propaganda and requests for support. You will show up on their walking lists as a possible swing voter. In my opinion it wouldn't be worth it,and the ethics are sketchy.

[Journeyman]

20. I've voted Republican in primaries before, to forestall a particularly evil candidate . . .

I'd consider doing it again if I thought it would weaken Trump.

Of course, it would depend on who the candidates were in the running on the Democratic side when California votes (which is early this year, so there may be a wide field still in contention), and what my eventual candidate may face at that time. But the thought of wounding Trump, in any small measure possible, would be a powerful enticement.

And as I'm in California, an open primary state, I wouldn't need to change my affiliation, so that wouldn't pose a downside to the idea.

[AdamGG]

23. "Particularly evil candidate" is part of my reasoning

Like when David Duke was running for the Republican nomination for Governor of Louisiana would be a good example. Trump certainly qualifies, but it will depend how passionate I am about one Democratic candidate versus the others after watching the debates. Also, if Weld is polling at 4% in Mass., I wouldn't bother. But, if he's polling at 44%, it would get enticing.

[Journeyman]

26. It might be enticing if Weld (or anyone else) is at 20% or so. That might be enough . . .

to throw a damper in Trump's support. Not much, but enough to give an edge.

[AdamGG]

28. I agree. I was just trying to be alliterative with the 4's.

[Jim_Pridx]

29. Exactly!

We're all somewhat programmed to believe and to vote systematically according to our own political beliefs and affiliations, but every once in a while a vote for someone in the opposing party may actually help to eliminate an existing fool in power while also benefiting the party or our own interests, particularly if the individual within our own party has already secured his or her place in office. I personally see nothing wrong with this.

[Retrograde]

30. California's not quite open primary

Each recognized political party - and there are 6 of them - can decide independently whether or not they will allow voters registered as No Party Preference to vote in their primaries. In 2016, the Democratic, American Independent, and one other party allowed NPP voters to cast ballots in their primaries: the Republican party and 2 others did not. And if voters are registered with a party, they can only vote in the primary for that party. Voters can change their party preference up to a couple of weeks before the primary election: this requires re-registering.

NPP voters who vote by mail must request an appropriate party ballot - if allowed - before voting. This caused a lot of problems in 2016, especially with new voters who weren't up on the rules.

[Journeyman]

35. Thanks for the info . . .

I was unaware of these nuances in the rules.

I personally abhor the open primary situation, as well as the "top two" candidates. If it looks like it'll be worth it to vote Republican next year, I'll change my affiliation if needed. I've done it before, to vote, as I mentioned above, against a particularly evil candidate. (And even then, only if I'm certain my favored candidates are comfortably ahead.)

[Hekate]

32. Hmmm, where did we hear this before? Oh yeah-- Nader/Gore. Not just no but HELL NO.

That is all.

[AdamGG]

34. But that was the general election. Nader wasn't running in the R primary against GW Bush

I don't think voting for McCain over Bush in the 2000 primary is the same as voting for Nader in the 2000 general. One is strictly an anti-Bush vote and the other denies Gore a vote.

[Chemisse]

33. I also did this to vote for McCain in the New Hampshire primary that year.

I think this time around it would depend on a few factors.

Are people really voting for the Dem candidate who stands the best chance of winning or will my vote be better used there?

Could Weld actually win the primary? If so, that would probably make our chances worse. Would I rather see Weld in the race even though he could win, for the sake of the nation and all that is sane? Or should I stick with voting in the Dem primary?

All this should become clear in the months to come, but like you, if conditions are right, I may do just that.

[tritsofme]

37. Weld is not a serious candidate, you would be wasting your vote.

[Hekate]

38. As someone else pointed out already, you are skating on very thin ice here. We don't vote for GOP

We don't advocate for GOP or 3rd party candidates.

If you are sincere, come up with a different strategy.