[SketchySeaBeast]

I don't know if the fact that it fully slipped into the absurd or the fact that it probably still worked on people is sadder.

I do love the idea of voter registration oscillating back and fourth at 20 minutes intervals forever. Would make voting in the primaries way more exciting as the voter base kept flipping.

[zahlman]

To me as a Canadian, the absurd part is that ordinary people are expected to have "registered" with a party (as opposed to registering with the independent organization that runs elections, like we do; they automate getting most of the voter roll from Revenue Canada, but this requires your explicit consent on the tax form).

[technothrasher]

I've never once registered with a party in the US. I always check "independent" on my voter registration. But I'm in a state with open primaries, so I can still vote in one or the other primary, even though I'm not registered with the party.

[LorenzoGood]

This is just for primaries, you register to vote with the state as well.

[zahlman]

In Canada, those votes happen independently as decided (deemed necessary) internally by the party, and public participation is much less common.

[buellerbueller]

Still absurd that "free" "democratic" elections are allowed to require party membership, even for the primary.

[schnable]

What's the purpose of a primary election? It's to select a party's candidate for a general election. It's not very obvious that this should even be a democratic process, but if it is, why shouldn't party members be the ones selecting their own candidates?

[buellerbueller]

It's funded by tax dollars, and regulated by local and state laws.

If they want their own private primaries, then it should happen internally and at the parties' own expense.

[lbotos]

How do you envision this working without the "opposing party" poisoning the vote to get a weaker opponent?

[buellerbueller]

I envision that it does not matter, because this is a tactic that would 1) be available to all, and 2) it gives up your vote for someone of your own party, thereby weakening your own position. It's self regulating.

[mothballed]

Can't they do that now? If I think my chosen primary guy is winning in a landslide I could just register for another party I don't like and vote for someone who I think is easier to beat.

[yunwal]

You would still forfeit the ability to vote in your primary though. I do think there are people that do this, but most people want to vote in their primary regardless of whether it's a landslide.

[bell-cot]

Is actual party membership required?

Or, in effect, are you just required to claim either that you're more of a cat person, or that you're more of a dog person?

[1-more]

Yeah it's the latter. The US does not have party membership the way that, say, the UK does. In many states, it's open primary. In Colorado, for instance, I get mailed Democratic and Republican primary ballots and can vote by mailing in either one. I think you get neither counted if you mail in both, but I have no idea; I've never tried it.

The last time anyone tried to poison a presidential election by promoting a weaker candidate on the other side in the US, it was the Democrats boosting Trump in 2016. It did not work out.

[Izkata]

For an alternate example, in Illinois you choose one at primary election time and only get that one. This year the options are Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, and Non-Partisan (which means only the referendums, not the elections).

[SketchySeaBeast]

This would kind of be the same as us (I'm Canadian too) registering with the NDP so we can vote for the next leader. But the level of lying on display here is just insane.

[Hizonner]

> I don't know if the fact that it fully slipped into the absurd or the fact that it probably still worked on people is sadder.

The thing is that that one plays on propaganda that people have already been conditioned to accept.

Very probably this person's father believes that the Democrats (a) control the state-operated voter registration system, and (b) manipulate it to their advantage. He believes that because he's been sent that message through a vast number of channels for many years. He would think it was absolutely in character for his registered party to be changed, and would probably think that would somehow affect how his vote was actually counted.

It's no more absurd than the idea that busloads of illegal aliens are showing up to vote "somewhere". Or whatever other idiotic lies they've been telling forever.

[idiotsecant]

This isn't even close to the most ridiculous emotional manipulation techniques American conservative fundraising uses to target old people who might not be in full possession of their faculties. It's some of the scummiest stuff possible.