Anytime an individual or a group is agonizing over an important decision, it's time to use a cost-benefit analysis to tally up the pros and cons of doing or of not doing something.
The issue of the day is whether or not to allow independents to participate in the GOP primary voting.
Both sides have good points. Arguments for excluding independents are many. It forces fence sitters in voter registration who lean Republican to register that way. Also it reduces the chance that Democrats could change registration to manipulate a key election.
However, consider the costs? The liberal press will certainly bash Republicans for being a small state party that finds a way to exclude people who would otherwise show interest. Conservative outlets may even join that chorus for reasons of their own. Bad press represents a cost even though ideally it should not serve as a factor.
Also, how often do we have a situation where we have close primary races between one very electable candidate and one extremely awful candidate? Not many Democrats in West Virginia would drop their registration at this point to intentionally smack down an electable GOP alternative.
Finally, how many registrations would we pick up to offset the costs? A few hundred? Maybe.
A better plan lies in remembering our free market ideals. We have competition from the Democratic, Independent, and in some races, Mountain brands. Instead of finding ways to reduce the competition for registered voters, let us embrace the system as it is and create a product that voters will choose. An exciting, energetic, innovative GOP will attract registrations and voters come election day. Building up the party is the answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment