Virginia GOP Demands Loyalty Oath From Primary Voters
The Virginia GOP has found an interesting way to discourage non-Republicans from voting in their presidential primary. Voters will be required to sign an oath, pledging to support the party's nominee for president.
Sen. Harry Byrd Jr. (D-VA) famously bolted from the Democrats and became an independent in the 1970s due to such a loyalty oath being imposed on candidates, but this goes an extra step by putting the the oath to voters. Oddly enough, the state Board of Elections has approved the request, even though it would be impossible to enforce the contract not only practically, but probably in legal terms, too — as contracts requiring a party to vote a certain way in an election are illegal.
Comments (20)
thill wrote on November 28, 2007 9:12 AM:How preposterous! To think that you would even be "morally" obliged to vote for whoever gets the nomination. What a joke!
NitPicker1 wrote on November 28, 2007 9:59 AM:Well, maybe enforcing this contract would be the excuse for allowing the Republican Party to see how individuals actually voted in the presidential election. Or even better - program the electronic voting machines to automatically override any GOP primary voter who neglects to "support his party" in the general election. After all, what could be more clear "voter intent" than that signed loyalty oath?
I *think* I'm being tongue-in-cheek here. :-(
someparisian wrote on November 28, 2007 10:18 AM:They have Republicans left in Virginia?
VALawyer wrote on November 28, 2007 10:33 AM:Legally, it would be completely nonbinding--but would most people forced to sign it know that? Probably not. That's how it's of utility to VA GOP trying to discourage independents and Dems from meddling in their primary.
not the senator wrote on November 28, 2007 10:37 AM:So, Virginia will be turning solid Democratic next year?
Richard L. Adlof wrote on November 28, 2007 11:19 AM:Do you have to show to hood or jack-boots to vote Republican in Virginia?
I swear fealty to the royal three . . . Republicanism, Rolls Royces and Rolexes . . . Long may we rule in lockstep?
Michael wrote on November 28, 2007 11:19 AM:Yep not the senator, virginia is turning more democratic every day. My favorite senator is webb, what a great contribution by virginia to the us. And they will have another dem senator in warner in 08, unless clinton II turns virgina ruby red again.
Rich wrote on November 28, 2007 12:34 PM:Loyalty oaths, eh? Gimme eat!
Steve Green wrote on November 28, 2007 12:40 PM:I'm not an official republican, but I am conservitive in many ways. However, I urge each and every Republican in Virginia to boycott the Republican party for this. If things don't work out for them they will try to make it a legal case. My question is how would they know which way people voted?
phil james wrote on November 28, 2007 1:17 PM:So it looks like the Lynchburg lunatics with their pointy white hats and Neanderthal brows have finally gotten a firm hold on the VA GOP. This is great news for VA Dems!
iburl wrote on November 28, 2007 1:24 PM:I assume this has something to do with keeping Paul voters away.
Bonnie B wrote on November 28, 2007 1:30 PM:They (Dems in the primary) tried to do this where I live (SC) back during the last election. It didn't fly and they couldn't keep people from voting if they didn't sign it. VA won't be able to do it either.
Tom wrote on November 28, 2007 1:41 PM:Next thing they'll want is a blood oath to whoever the Republicans elect as their next Fuhrer.
"I swear by God this sacred oath: I will render unconditional obedience to [insert name of Republican President], the Führer of the American Reich and people, Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, and will be ready as a brave soldier to risk my life at any time for this oath."
ALEX H. wrote on November 28, 2007 2:27 PM:
.
This is just another sign of the total desperation of the Repugs, a party that, that's to DickNBush, is in its last death throes.
At least we can all rejoice in the fact that the total end of the Repug party is less than one year away!
.
po wrote on November 28, 2007 3:48 PM:So what does that say about VA election officials if they are willing to sign off on a party plan that is patently unenforceable (likely void as against public policy and certainly unenforceable) on its face. An arm of the government assisting in illegal schemes to threaten voters into submission. Wonder what the GOP in Florida and Ohio have in mind.
Anonymous wrote on November 28, 2007 5:43 PM:From the Code of Virginia --
§ 24.2-545. Presidential primary.
A. The duly constituted authorities of the state political party shall have the right to determine the method by which the state party will select its delegates to the national convention to choose the party's nominees for President and Vice President of the United States including a presidential primary or another method determined by the party. The state chairman shall notify the State Board of the party's determination at least 90 days before the primary date. If the party has determined that it will hold a presidential primary, each registered voter of the Commonwealth shall be given an opportunity to participate in the presidential primary of the political party, as defined in § 24.2-101, subject to requirements determined by the political party for participation in its presidential primary. The requirements may include, but shall not be limited to, the signing of a pledge by the voter of his intention to support the party's candidate when offering to vote in the primary. The requirements applicable to a party's primary shall be determined at least 90 days prior to the primary date and certified to, and approved by, the State Board.
2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Every Tuesday Evening.
Isn't the salute from the boy scouts ? Is it a signal for more congressional PAGES ?
ptcruiser wrote on November 30, 2007 12:41 AM:I don't agree with the use of loyalty oaths but your little anecdote about Harry Byrd neglects to mention that Byrd's deflection had a lot more to do with race than loyalty oaths. Byrd and his ilk wanted to continue to call the shots in the Democratic Party while still doing their utmost to prevent blacks from exercising their rights as American citizens. Byrd and hundreds like him across the south were threatening to support Republicans if they could not continue to get their way in the Democratic Party.
John W. Butler wrote on January 24, 2008 10:34 PM:It should be automatic that one person can only vote for one candidate in a primary, and if they want to change their party, before or after the primary, fine. But they should not be able to vote twice. No oath required if each person could only vote once in a combined primary (I, D, R, write-in), the same as in a real election. This is an example of how everybody can debate something easily solved by the simplest solution.
