April 4, 2016

I genuinely don't know...

... who I'm voting for in the primary tomorrow. I am definitely voting and I hope to decide during the walk to the polling place but can easily imagine not deciding until after I've picked up the pen to mark the ballot....

79 comments:

mccullough said...

You don't know what ballot you'll even pick? Interesting.

MaxedOutMama said...

Well, my sympathy and best wishes. Afterwards you can have a beer or something to kill the pain.

Expat(ish) said...

I am always shocked at ostensibly smart people who say things like that.

These are often people who wouldn't go to the grocery store without a list.

-XC

Marc Puckett said...

Here in Oregon, we do voting by mail (which so far as I'm concerned is awful public policy but that's neither here nor there): I wonder, having had the ballot for ten days or whatever it is, in this primary election, if you'd wait until the last hour to deposit it in the collection box (they look like mail boxes only they're distressingly beige colored)?

m11_9 said...

Because you don't want a future campaign to send to a "voter violation" postcard. No shaming in your future.

Rich Rostrom said...

I hope at least you know who you're not voting for.

Birkel said...

Take the George Kostanza challenge.

buck said...

Vote Cruz. You're welcome.

Jonathan Graehl said...

there's what feels authentic, and what's sensible. i think they're the same, but many, like you, are conflicted.

sean said...

Wow, that is really weird. I don't know what's going to happen to me, but I always know exactly what I'm going to do.

steve uhr said...

My odds on your vote -- 60% Sanders, 30% trump, 5% Cruz, 5% Hillary

Sammy Finkelman said...

There was a Supreme Court case about the Wisconsin Presidential primary:

Democratic Party v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette 450 U.S. 107 (1981)

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/450/107.html

News articles about it:

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/02/26/us/justices-uphold-democrats-on-rules-to-pick-delegates.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/02/26/us/wisconsin-politicians-dismayed-by-court-decision.html

It apparently had less effect than they thought it would at the time. Virtually nothing has changed (or has it?)





rhhardin said...

Vote for the one you want most.

Otherwise you're gaming the system against others who have already voted for the one they want most.

David said...

Vote for Meade.

cyrus83 said...

Assuming the choice is not a write-in (which sometimes seems like the best option in both parties this year), my guess is Bernie gets the vote. That's mostly a guess that in the end Bernie's relative honesty and lack of cronyism/corruption compared to Clinton wins out.

The New York primary should be rather uneventful. Oddly enough in New York, there is no same-day registration (cutoff to register for the primary was March 25 and will be October 14 for the general), no early voting (other than absentee), and no changing of parties within 6 months of the primary election. I know which way I will be voting in that one, but given there are only 2 candidates, and I know a write-in has a snowball's chance, I am going for the least-bad option.

Amexpat said...

Keep it simple and real - vote for who you think would be the best president.

John said...

Ann,

I am not on the ballot but am registered at the FEC as a candidate for the Democrat nomination.

I've supported your blog for many years. Perhaps you could support me by writing in my name:

John R Henry

Bob Boyd said...

Don't walk past the Hillary sign.

traditionalguy said...

You could make America great again. Or you could help Ryan and Priebus play tricks. Too bad Scott walker rang out. We all liked him.

pm317 said...

It won't be Cruz.

ndspinelli said...

Make certain you find someone to tell WHO GIVES A RAT'S ASS.

Unknown said...

It will be Hillary.

Deirdre Mundy said...

I just saw Kasich's town hall on Greta tonight. (Was at my in-laws' house and they were watching.)

I don't understand why the man has gotten no traction. He seems sane, sensible,likeable and knowledgeable.

What is wrong with politics this year????

traditionalguy said...

Does your nephew know Jim Herman's story. Herman won his first PGA Tournament today at age 38 after The Donald helped him go on tour with sponsor money when he was a Pro at a Trump course in New Jersey, and added encouragement last week when they played together in Palm Beach

Another tear jerker, like Miss Wisconsin's story, but this time it works on for male golfers. Hermie goes to the Masters Thursday! And he's crying with joy.

Think about Trump the cheerleader when you set out to vote tomorrow. The President has to be one. FDR taught us that.

bagoh20 said...

Maybe you should leave it to those who take it more serious. Otherwise you are just diluting such a person's effort and conviction. Why would anyone want to do that? Then again, I do see the value in it. It depends on who I just talked to.

Robin Eatmon said...

Trump. Good heart. Capitalist. Naive about the savagery of evil media and power brokers.
Clinton. Dark heart. Liar.
Sanders. Commie. Only kids who don't better should vote for him.
Cruz. Smart. Too much of a politician.
That other guy. Just no.

madAsHell said...

What is wrong with politics this year????

Obama, and Hillary!! Nobody wants a repeat.

Lawrence Person said...

Ann, what is your opinion on Ted Cruz's understanding of the 10th Amendment?

n.n said...

Follow the prevailing winds... They will guide you.

Saint Croix said...

You got three Satans and two Republicans. Easy peasy!

Big Mike said...

Have you at least decided which primary you're voting in?

n.n said...

Saint Croix:

To be fair, Satan does promise a softer landing, and the collateral, while nonnegotiable, enters the market sometime after conception. Later for some, earlier for others. Repent! ... or buy Hell futures or Planned Parenthood stock.

Bob Ellison said...

This post and thread are way too meeeeeee for me. Please get on toward real discussions.

Ann Althouse said...

I don't support any of the candidates, but I would like to see an open convention for the GOP. I think the strategic vote is different from voting for who I think would make the best President.

Ann Althouse said...

I think it's that I so dislike what I will have to do that I don't want to have it in my head.

My first post this morning shows the conflict that is dogging me.

Fritz said...

One could do worse than to take the advice of Robert Heinlein:

If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for...but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong. If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires.

There should be no lack of well-meaning fools in Madison.

Gusty Winds said...

Today on Twitter from DRPK, the official government news agency of North Korea.

"US Province of Wisconsin, immoral fairyland of anarchy and excessive consumption of dairy products and alcohol, has elections for President."

I take no offense.

forest said...

Tonight I was a delegate to our county Republican convention here in Nebraska. We elected delegates to our state convention. The state convention will send 36 delegates to the national convention. Our national delegates are bound for the first two ballots to vote for the winner of the Republican primary, which will be held May 10. The primary is winner take all. One of our senators, Ben Sasse, and a former governor, Kay Orr, have written essays against Trump. Marlene Ricketts, mother of the governor, has contributed to an anti - Trump pac. The most probable winner of the primary is Cruz.

None of our county's delegates took any kind of public position. But, from my acquaintanceship with them, I believe most would have no problem voting for the party "establishment" candidate after the second ballot if either Trump or Cruz fails to get 1237 on the first or second ballot.

If I were voting tomorrow in Madison, I would vote Trump. Like many, my votes are influenced by my life experience. This election, I believe national security, immigration and trade are paramount. Trump has broken the sound barrier on these in a way no one else has been able to do. I wish Sen. Jeff Sessions, who has endorsed Trump, were running but he is not.

Ann, if Trump is still in the running for you as you walk to the polls, your vote for him would matter. He will not survive a contested convention.

Thank you for this blog and your outstanding analyses, which have been of solace to me in difficult times.

Ken B said...

If you dislike them all then figure out who you like least, and vote for one of his rivals.

CachorroQuente said...

News reports are that in Wisconsin there is only one ballot, not a separate one for each party. So, if that is correct, one need not make a party choice at all. I don't know if this allows someone to vote for a presidential candidate from one party and candidates for other races from the other party. Seems weird to me. Perhaps I misunderstood the report, actual current Wisconsinites should know.

As for who Althouse should vote for, my suggestion is Kasich. Cruz is likely less popular in her congressional district than in other districts in Wisconsin and Kasich likely more popular resulting in a better chance for Kasich than for Cruz. The important goal is to try to keep Trump to either zero or three delegates for the whole state and a Kasich win in Althouse's district would help. Of course, Althouse is going to vote for Clinton in the general election but voting for Clinton or Sanders in the primary is to waste the vote as Clinton's nomination is assured no matter what Wisconsin does in the primary.

Paul said...

Surely you at least who you are NOT going to vote for?

Marc Puckett said...

I don't see why you, AA, go to vote at all. You don't positively support any of them, and it seems to me that it is far from morally certain that your (so-called 'strategic') vote for N (because his success will impede A's) will actually have that effect. Stay home, read, write, go biking. The Republic will survive. Then go out and find someone to actually support next time. While I respect the insights & illumination that your posts so often bring to the public issues of the day, I can't myself stand the thin-aired heights where such (apparent, anyway) constant preoccupation with all of it seems of such consequence. (For all we know, of course, you are playing at whist or pinochle every night and having a laugh at them who are so ridiculously invested in the ups and downs of this primary nonsense.)

CachorroQuente said...

To make this a little more clear: Cruz is not going to win the 2nd Congressional District vote, it will be won by either Trump or Kasich. In the 2nd, a vote for Cruz is a vote for Trump.

gadfly said...

Well - you can always vote for "Uninstructed Delegation" and someone else will decide for you.

Freeman Hunt said...

It's Cruz to stop Trump, and then holding out hope for a Walker or similar at the convention.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

WAIT! DON'T VOTE TUESDAY! If you vote in the Dem or GOP primary Tuesday you will not be able to vote in the Wisconsin Libertarian primary on August 9th.

Freeman Hunt said...

You win wars battle by battle. Current battle: stop Trump. If he isn't stopped, then the candidates we have now are the only ones we're going to have.

eddie willers said...

Vote Trump.
You'll thank me later.

cyrus83 said...

I definitely don't want Trump as the GOP nominee, and while I'd take a brokered convention to achieve that aim, I have a hard time picturing who they could nominate that would actually be a winner.

The party at one and the same time needs someone who appeals to the primary voters who are going for Trump, yet at the same time also appeals to those who would never accept Trump. I don't think the party can choose anyone who ran in this primary cycle - things haven't gone well the last 2 cycles by selecting the guy who lost the prior contested cycle's primary. I don't see a whole lot left among the governors or members of Congress who didn't run who would be a strong choice.

The only advantage the GOP has if it goes to a brokered convention is that it should have a pretty clear idea who the Democratic nominee is going to be and can choose strategically based on that. Much as I dislike pandering, if the GOP is going to face Hillary, I would be strongly tempted to pick a woman candidate for the simple reason that it blunts Hillary's strongest selling feature (to the non-hardcore Dem voter contingent anyway), the history of electing the first woman President.

Mick said...

Well let's see... Cruz is not eligible, so Kasich then (at least he is "civil")? What could those kids possibly be learning from a "law prof" who doesn't know what a natural born Citizen is? Are you really that dense?

"Naturalization" definition in INS 1952--- "conferring nationality upon a person after birth by any means whatsoever." (INS 1852 (23)).

"ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER"= by statute.

Cruz would never have been considered even a US Citizen until he was given that status by STATUTE= he was naturalized by statute ("any means whatsoever"-- 8 US Code 1401(g)).

There is no need to go through a "naturalization process" if one is naturalized by statute "at birth" ("at birth" is "after birth"-- it doesn't happen in the womb or birth canal)

Cruz is NATURALIZED by 8 US Code 1401(g), i.e NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN,

Get a clue "law prof". Lawyers did this to America, especially "lawyers" who serve in Congress and in the Ivory Tower of Academia (where educated idiots reside and are made).

Excuse me for not being "civil".

Mick said...

OpenID cyrus83 said...
"I definitely don't want Trump as the GOP nominee, and while I'd take a brokered convention to achieve that aim, I have a hard time picturing who they could nominate that would actually be a winner".


How is that majority in both houses working out for you? There is no difference. Paul Ryan is a traitor. But you keep hoping....

Mick said...

Freeman Hunt said...
"It's Cruz to stop Trump, and then holding out hope for a Walker or similar at the convention".


My god it is really dense in here.

Mick said...

buck said...
"Vote Cruz. You're welcome".


Cruz is not eligible. See above.

Terry said...

Look, with this "Gosh! Who shall I vote for?" theater, Althouse is clearing trying to sell her vote. It's probably up on Ebay.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Blue Devils Democrat said...

I voted for Bernie Sanders.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brando said...

Unless you genuinely want Hillary Clinton to be our next president--and to get there by default rather than actually having to get people to support her on her own merits--the only goal right now is to keep Trump from becoming the GOP nominee. It's likely that a party split will mean defeat for the GOP either way, but there is almost no chance of Trump winning the general election. He has proven toxic to a solid majority of the country, and he isn't some "unknown" quantity that people are likely to change their minds about later. Further, he has shown an inability to mend fences and reach out beyond his small base. A vote for Trump is a clear signal that either you really don't care about winning in November, or you're willing to count on some miracle (if a Trump presidency constitutes a "miracle") to save the day.

And by "Hillary winning" I don't mean another four years like the past four, with the GOP there as a check on her--we are now facing what seemed unthinkable a year ago. Trump as a nominee risks losing both houses of Congress, as GOP candidates up for election have to consider whether to back their nominee (maybe, but maybe not pleasing his supporters in their districts and certainly turning off the majority of non-Republicans and anti-Trump Republicans in their districts and states).

Hillary with a majority Democratic Congress and perhaps three Supreme Court vacancies to fill? Good luck impeaching her if she gets indicted. Good luck stopping anything she wants to do.

The GOP has its chance to stop the bleeding and get something out of this year.

rhhardin said...

Your vote won't matter anyway. Unfortunately there are so many women voting that it adds up.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brando said...

"It is my feeling we will not make it to November. I think, as Trump is predicting, that the stock market is crashing, and it will be a complete sell off this summer. It will make 1929 look like a Mardi Gras week."

Trump is doing as Paul Krugman did--if you constantly predict a crash you will eventually be right. Trump has been more wrong than right, though--he (as well as most people) got the last housing bubble wrong.

But I do think we're due for a recession and at least some stock market drop (not a 1929 level crash, but more a 2000 one). But do you believe it enough to sell all your stocks and sit on cash for a while? Depends I think on how close you are to retirement age. I have a ways to go but if I were say 60 I might feel differently.

Rusty said...

Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"I think it's that I so dislike what I will have to do that I don't want to have it in my head.

My first post this morning shows the conflict that is dogging me."

Don't overthink it , Althouse. Go with your gut.

Beaumont said...

"Or: These candidates are all disgusting, but you're the least disgusting." Is this your dilemma? Prior to all of the dropouts, was there anyone running that you would have voted for? And Why?

Birkel said...

Except for all the courts which have ruled Cruz is eligible...

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brando said...

"Except for all the courts which have ruled Cruz is eligible... "

Keep in mind we're talking about people like Trump who still doubted Obama was born in this country long after he provided copies of his birth certificate, even though they had absolutely no evidence whatsoever that he was born anywhere else. This is a reality-challenged community. It's not the least bit surprising that Trump hits the batshit trifecta of being a Birther, a 9/11 Truther, and an Anti-Vaxxer.

So Ted Cruz could have been born in St. Louis on the Fourth of July and sprang from a red white and blue cake to the tune of Yankee Doodle, and this lot would still say he's not eligible to be president with no shred of anything to back them up. Maybe they're trying to subtly signal to the less tolerant that Cruz is some "other" due to his Cuban heritage, or maybe they're just all around nuts.

Beaumont said...

Ann: What do you dislike about voting for Cruz as a means to an open convention? That it might backfire and be misinterpreted by the Cruz forces? That you are 'deceiving' Ted Cruz' because you are not voting for him to be the presidential candidate, but to block someone else from being the candidate? Is your conflict a moral or ethical one? an emotional one? a strategic one?

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rich Buck said...

Trump - Cruz is vile - this is just a primary.

tim in vermont said...

I felt the same way and voted for Kasich because I thought he could win the general and I was never that good at triple bank shots.

policraticus said...

VOTE SMOD.

It's the only way to be sure.

Curious George said...

How about Wisco Supreme Court? What are you doing there?

Dr Weevil said...

Gusty Winds (11:17pm):
That "official" North Korean twitter account is a parody, run by one of the Popehat guys. Don't be embarrassed if it fooled you. It's fooled all the major networks and national newspapers at least once.

Ann:
I may have posted this story in a comment here before, but:

Assuming you're down to two choices, you and Meade could do what my parents did in 1960 - my earliest political memory, at 7 1/2. They'd both despised Nixon since they'd first heard of him, and they'd both despised the entire Kennedy family since they'd first head of any of them, but they thought they had a duty to vote. So they flipped a coin and one voted for each. Ten years later, when I was in high school and getting interested in politics, I asked them, and they couldn't remember who voted for which. Their votes didn't actually cancel out since service members (dad was in the Navy) and spouses could continue voting in their home states as they moved all around the world. So my dad's Rhode Island vote didn't have much effect, but mom's vote either slightly widened or slightly narrowed Kennedy's very slim margin in Illinois.

Bob Ellison said...

We're all thinking this time my vote really matters!

MadisonMan said...

I decided on the bike ride down to the polling place. Always fun to vote and say Hi to all the neighbors working there.

I did not bother to fill in all the circles for the uncontested races.

machine said...

"This is a reality-challenged community."

Curious George said...

"MadisonMan said...
I decided on the bike ride down to the polling place. Always fun to vote and say Hi to all the neighbors working there.

I did not bother to fill in all the circles for the uncontested races."

Sounds like Madison's motto "Relax. Everything is going to be all white!" remains.

Mark said...

So what's the problem going to be in Waukesha County tonight, just a delay or other irregularities?

I wonder if Trump knows the name Waukesha now. I bet he will by tonight.

I just wonder if he will pronounce it the way my phone's GPS does, like it's a black womans name `Wa Kesha'. Always worth a laugh on the drive to the in laws house.