*facepalm*

[eruthros]

No, seriously *facepalm* here, guys. Because... in the state of Virgina, the Republicans have decided to make a loyalty oath part of their primary I am so not kidding. People voting in the primary will have to sign a form indicating that they will vote for the Republican candidate in November, no matter who wins the primary! I mean! Guys! WHAT THE FUCK. I don't care that it's non-binding -- it is so fucking ridiculous that there are no WORDS.

From The Roanoke Times and Salon.com's War Room.

Comments

[honorh.livejournal.com]

What's the point? What the hell is the point?

[eruthros]

Maybe they hope that it'll either a) drive moderates away from the primary, because they'll not want to sign it even if it's non-binding or b) make people feel obligated or c) make people think it's a legal oath, not a ... weird Republican party one?

Whichever answer it is? The world sucks.

[darthrami.livejournal.com]

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah, liking that we moved out of VA still. Not that I'd be voting in the VA primaries or anything, but still.


(of course, it's probably because of people like a girl I know, who registered republican just to vote against W in the primary.)

[eruthros]

Well, or it's to make sure that people who go in to vote for the moderate feel obligated to vote for the super-conservative if he's the guy to get the nom, you know? Because they don't want to lose people to CHOICES!

[strange-selkie.livejournal.com]

How can one have a non-binding oath? :)

[(Anonymous)]

Well, you know what I mean! They say it's a binding oath, but they can't check up on you or anything. So it's ... there's no penalty, except the personal "I feel bad because I signed an oath and that broke it."

[umbo.livejournal.com]

OMFG.

[eruthros]

*agrees* So. Much. Ridiculous.

[significantowl.livejournal.com]

...

I am looking for words and I cannot find them ANYWHERE. My god.

[eruthros]

I KNOW. I hate the world, basically. It is so ridiculous.

[fiatlouis.livejournal.com]

I have an awful lot of trouble believing it would be legal to make someone vote a certain way. You could ask them to make a promise, but I don't think you can legally bind them to a certain vote. If you can actually do that? This country is fucked.

[eruthros]

No, it's not legally binding -- that's what I meant when I said, above, "nonbinding" -- in part because votes remain anonymous! But people might find the making of a promise itself ethically binding, or they might think that it was legally binding although it is not, or they might just avoid the primaries, etc.