Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

• Virginia allows political parties to choose their own method of nominating candidates. Virginia also expects that political parties generally will run and fund the costs of their nomination process.[2] However, at the request of the party, Virginia will provide a state-run and state-funded open primary. See Virginia Code § 24.2-530. Although political parties may have a closed primary if the parties administer and fund it, there is no provision for a state-run or state-funded closed primary. The choices as to the method of nomination and/or whether to take advantage of the State’s offer of a state-run and state-funded open primary are left entirely to the party. No party is required to do anything.

Now I understand. This is all about scamming the state to underwrite the Republican Party. Trent Lott must be proud!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Now I understand. This is all about scamming the state to underwrite the Republican Party. Trent Lott must be proud!

If it's state action, and anyone can vote, why is it a scam?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
That can't possibly be binding, and is therefore bullshit. I would sign something that stupid, knowing it was an out-and-out lie.

so our dating contract, and what you promised to do on the third date, that is meaningless?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
so our dating contract, and what you promised to do on the third date, that is meaningless?

Absolutely. I don't think you can get specific performance for personal services.

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
It is the linking of the loyalty oath to how they will vote in a secret, general election that I find odious.

Tell this to the UFT or the AFLCIO

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop

• 2 To be sure, a party’s nomination process, even when conducted and funded entirely by the party rather than by the State, amounts to state action. Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 663-63 (1944); Terry v. Adams, 345 U.S. 461, 472-74 (1953) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).

I have a problem with Frankfurter's concurrence, yes. Perhaps it make sense in its original context.

[SlaveNoMore]

ironweed
Sure you would. But what if you thought that lying was a sin and you'd be punished for it in the afterlife? Or, like Slave, that Santa sees everything you do and won't bring you a hockey stick for Christmas? These are Republicans we're talking about.

Santa's bringing me a FC Shakhtar Donetsk win.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Tell this to the UFT or the AFLCIO

If a labor union were to say that you couldn't vote in a union election unless you pledged to vote for the union-supported candidate in a general election, that would reek. I've never heard of that happening, though.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

• The Republican Party of Virginia wants voters in the Feb. 12 GOP presidential primary to sign a pledge that they will support the party's nominee.
  
  The state Board of Elections approved the request yesterday.
  
  Those who wish to cast a ballot in the Republican presidential primary will have to sign a statement that says, "I, the undersigned, pledge that I intend to support the nominee of the Republican Party for president."

Paul Waldman sees this as an effort to tell GOP voters what to do in the general election, but I think it's more an effort to ensure that moderates don't vote in the primary. Spanky, what do you think?

These moralizing waterheads love pledges. They sign abstinence pledges, joing the Promise Keepers, etc. Blind consistency and stupidity, hand in hand as always.

Who wouldn't lie on a form they were handing to some right-wing political volunteer? If you can't lie to that stripe of hypocrite, who can you lie to?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If it's state action, and anyone can vote, why is it a scam?

The point was that the loyalty oath is a way of making this effectively a closed primary for the benefit of the Rs when the state is only holding an open primary, and would only permit a closed primary if the Rs paid for it.

[andViolins]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If a labor union were to say that you couldn't vote in a union election unless you pledged to vote for the union-supported candidate in a general election, that would reek. I've never heard of that happening, though.

Isn't he referring to EFCA?

aV

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by andViolins
Isn't he referring to EFCA?

aV

you have to ask questions directly to the underlying blogs, you can't ask Ty. I can't believe I have to keep saying this to you people.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Absolutely. I don't think you can get specific performance for personal services.

remember. this would be in small claims court. does that change stuff?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by andViolins
Isn't he referring to EFCA?

aV

Is that what it says? 'Splain, please.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Is that what it says? 'Splain, please.

QED

399-20