[EL] Herman Cain and Black Democrats

[Eric McGhee]

There was a fair amount of research on California's experience with the blanket primary a decade ago.  The evidence strongly suggests that the kind of strategic "raiding" described below (i.e., voting for the worst candidate in order to sabotage the nomination) is extremely rare.  It requires complicated coordination by voters (why raid if nobody else is doing it?) and is a much bigger gamble for the average voter than simply choosing the candidate one likes the best.

Of course, that's just an empirical issue--whether an open primary of any kind is a good idea is a separate question.

Cheers,
Eric

Eric McGhee  |  Policy Fellow  |  PPIC  |  415-291-4439

Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Public Policy Institute of California.

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of WewerLacy at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 11:35 AM
To: David at HoltzmanLaw.com; law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Herman Cain and Black Democrats

I actually have done legal work for a nonprofit Herman Cain chaired during the mid 2000's and I was an early contributor to his Presidential exploratory committee last January so far be it from me to address Professor Lowenstein's question from a political as opposed to a strictly election law perspective....

But I think it is a good question.  Where there is an open primary, is a result that voters of another party cross lines to affect the outcomes of the opposition party either out of affinity with a candidate of the other party, or to enhance the outcome in the general for their favored candidate by supporting whom they might consider to be the weaker opposition candidate?

It seems to me that perhaps in some settings, such as the south, where Herman is from and has been known as a Baptist minister, African Americans, particularly Baptists, who are also Democrats, might find reason to vote for Herman Cain out of affinity.

It seems to me that urban African Americans in large states like Illinois and New York, to the extent they vote, and to the extent the primaries are open, and who already support Obama out of shared ideology and more common affinity, might also vote for Cain in the open primary for several reasons; 1) the assure that the next president is an African-American regardless of which party wins the general election; 2) and perhaps of a perception, still to be proven, that Cain might be the weaker of the Republican candidates in the general election.

James V. Lacy
Wewer & Lacy, LLP
visit our website at www.wewerlacy.com<http://www.wewerlacy.com>

This of course goes to the core of what is wrong with an open primary system, as it creates an opportunity for manipulation of outcomes by voters who do not really support the platform of the party whose primary election they are raiding.  In California, the promoters of the open primary system stated they thought the system would moderate outcomes in both parties.  The price to be paid for moderation is less emphasis on a platform of idea and significant intervention by voters who do not share those views.  Creating opportunities for clever, well-funded consultants to further manipulate outcomes through advertising.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111102/940fdc9b/attachment.html>