Virginia’s Republican party leadership is a little bit nervous about this thing, “democracy,” that occasionally turns up results at odds with the agreed-upon election outcomes devised among their secret society of Ogre Kings, so this Super Tuesday they will be requiring voters to sign over their souls with a promise to support the eventual GOP nominee in the general election as a condition for being able to cast a ballot in the primary. Since the state has an open primary and Mitt Romney and Ron Paul were the only two candidates organized enough to qualify, we can think of this mostly as a STAY AWAY sign for the apocryphal hordes of librul anti-war, pot legalization-supporter hippies that Republicans fear will turn out to stoke mischief with a primary vote for Ron Paul. And yet, many voters are not exactly thrilled about this weird attempt at MIND CONTROL.
“To be fair” or whatever, voters were also Not Cool with a similar oath that the party tried to require in 2008, and it was eventually struck down amid wide revolt. Given that this was an enormous failure, uh, just try it again? SURE, seems like everyone is way more excited about it this time around.
[Virginia GOP delegate Bob] Marshall Thursday called on Virginia Republican leaders to ask state election officials to undo their approval of the loyalty oath, casting it as the wrong approach to protect the integrity of the primary.
“Loyalty oaths are detested by many good Republicans who solidly back our party’s principles and who have never voted for a Democrat in their lives,” the Prince William County Republican said in a statement.
Marshall also questioned the fiscal wisdom of “requiring Virginia election workers to enforce a Republican loyalty oath in a primary paid for by the general taxpayer.”
At the request of the Virginia GOP, the State Board of Election Wednesday approved a plan to present primary voters with a pledge affirming they will support the eventual GOP nominee as a condition of voting in the presidential nominating contest.
PSSST, they can’t actually make anyone prove they will follow the pledge, like all such annoying pledges. Maybe just a “no gun, no vote” sign out front would be more effective? [Richmond Times-Dispatch/ HamptonRoads.com]Related