Green Republicans

September 1, 2010 7:29 AM

Arizona Republicans defect... to the Green Party. Arizona Dems grow a pair react. The Greens' response.
posted by Rykey (17 comments total)

This just reinforces my opinion that the Democrats feel that they are the rightful owners of all votes that aren't cast for the Republicans.
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:30 AM on September 1, 2010 [4 favorites]

... possible voter fraud perpetrated by individuals affiliated with the Arizona Republican Party who have conspired to have Republicans re- register as members of the Arzona Green Party and then fie as write-in candidates for that pary when, in fact, they do not adhere to the Green Party's platform, have no intention of representing the Green Party, and have the explicit intent of deceiving voters and taking votes away from legitimate candidates. The purpose of this scheme is to ensure the election of Republican candidate.

There are no small number of Democrats who do not adhere to the Democratic Party's platform, who have no intention of representing the Democratic Party, and have the explicit intent of deceiving the voters....

Barack Obama, for example, seems to fit this bill pretty well.
posted by three blind mice at 7:34 AM on September 1, 2010 [4 favorites]

I don't know why we're shitting on Democrats if even the Green Party opposes these candidates.
posted by zerbinetta at 7:36 AM on September 1, 2010 [7 favorites]

Obama represents the Democratic Party perfectly.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:37 AM on September 1, 2010 [2 favorites]

Meanwhile in Michigan, the Democrats are starting their own Tea Party.
posted by TedW at 7:40 AM on September 1, 2010

These guys will do anything to avoid actually working on problems, won't they?
posted by DU at 7:43 AM on September 1, 2010

civility in politics: .
posted by jdfalk at 7:44 AM on September 1, 2010 [1 favorite]

Here in Texas, it's well-known that the GOP donors and the Rick Perry campaign have been funding Green Party candidate petitions.
posted by muddgirl at 7:50 AM on September 1, 2010

I don't know why we're shitting on Democrats if even the Green Party opposes these candidates.

This. They're clearly sham candidates, and they're clearly in the race to try and induce non-Republican voters to vote for Republicans by mistake. No matter how much the Democrats may suck, it doesn't make this less sleazy and cynical.

The Democrats will, of course, continue to react in a civilized fashion. Because they hope that quoting the school conduct guidelines will make the bully reconsider flushing their heads in the toilet. Just once, just once, I'd like to hear a Democratic candidate say outright that "so-and-so is a cheating sonofabitch and a liar. Don't vote for a man you couldn't trust in a nickel-ante poker game"
posted by tyllwin at 7:53 AM on September 1, 2010 [4 favorites]

These guys will do anything to avoid actually working on problems, won't they?

Yes. Tea-hadists have no interest in actual governing, the only goal is to win office and score points for their fanasty polical team. Once there, they will destroy as much of the evil and hated government at all levels as possible. When the beast is finally starved once and for all, Ayn Rand will reappear and lead all the faithful followers of Galt into the marketvana.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:56 AM on September 1, 2010 [2 favorites]

tyllwin: But when Democrats do that, they're shrill, vindictive, and using the legal system to persecute conservatives.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 7:57 AM on September 1, 2010

But none of this matters, right? I mean, it's not like the republicans will get away with doing this?
posted by wittgenstein at 7:58 AM on September 1, 2010

(I was ordering a hamburger while writing my last comment.)
posted by wittgenstein at 8:01 AM on September 1, 2010 [1 favorite]

I don't think I understand. How are these people called Green Party candidates if the Green Party does not endorse them?

Also, these people are all write-in candidates, am I correct? So they won't be on the ballot at all, right? You have to register yourself to run as a write-in candidate? And you can declare a party affiliation then?

If they're not on the ballot, does the party affiliation mean anything? Maybe it means that if they make lawn signs that say green party, they can't be charged with fraud. Except that the Green Party doesn't endorse them.

I give up. Little help?
posted by Galaxor Nebulon at 8:02 AM on September 1, 2010

But when Democrats do that, they're shrill, vindictive...

There's nothing that Democrats can do that will get them the approval of the right-wing, or get the right wing to mute their criticisms. I don't know why they can't seem to figure that out. The Democratic party might be worth something if they could ever stop trying to win the approval of their enemies, and instead actually stand for something. A good week for the Democrats does not consist of a week in which the Republicans were a little less harsh, and they need to deeply internalize that fact.
posted by tyllwin at 8:05 AM on September 1, 2010 [2 favorites]

Also, these people are all write-in candidates, am I correct? So they won't be on the ballot at all, right?

Wrong. It's a quirk of the state election law -- if no one else TRIED to get the Green Party spot on the ballot, the guy who wroite in his own name during the primary takes that slot on the ballot by default
posted by tyllwin at 8:08 AM on September 1, 2010

This just reinforces my opinion that the Democrats feel that they are the rightful owners of all votes that aren't cast for the Republicans.
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:30 AM on September 1

Read the article. The Green Party itself disavows these candidates. This is not Nader redux.

This is fraud, in the practical sense, and irrefutably so. You have one of the guys on tape saying it himself in his own voice.

Whether it violates criminal statutes or not is another matter entirely.
posted by discountfortunecookie at 8:11 AM on September 1, 2010