Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Primary here I come

I have never voted in a primary. I usually register independent and I haven't ever lived in a state where the presidential primary seemed like a big deal. In short, I've been like a whole lot of people who assume (tacitly usually) that elections like that are for "other people".

However, I've been following the challenge to Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman's comfortable incumbency for a while now and today, I decided I am going to register democrat just so I can go vote AGAINST Lieberman in the August 8th primary.

After Hillary Clinton's speech promoting the Democratic party's new "American Dream Initiative" (which is only new in packaging), I feel a little skeezy registering as a democrat. But I am so fed up with Lieberman and his current campaign that I am going to do it anyhow. What finally pushed me over the fence I was sitting on was this:

U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont released a document Tuesday showing he does not control investments in a stock fund that once included shares of Halliburton Co. The letter, signed by a Goldman, Sachs & Co. vice president, says the managed account is run by Goldman Sachs' Quantitative Equity Group, which makes all investment decisions. Halliburton stock is no longer part of that fund, Lamont Campaign Manager Tom Swan said last week when Lamont released his 2005 tax returns.
.....

U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman has repeatedly accused Lamont of having direct shares of Halliburton. The Connecticut Post reported last week that there is Halliburton stock in two mutual funds that Lieberman owns.

Lieberman spokeswoman Marion Steinfels would not comment on Lieberman's mutual funds.

"While Joe Lieberman was calling for a congressional investigation into Halliburton's abuses, Ned Lamont was profiting off them," she said in a written statement. "We are glad that Ned has dumped the $50,000 in stock that he owned in Halliburton."


This is part of why when I did have money, I was somewhat distrusting of mutual funds. You know, the whole "who the hell are they going to invest my money in?" issue. I've heard of "socially responsible mutual funds" but by the time I heard of that, I was well on my way to being divorced and destitute (my current status) and so I never really researched it. So really, I am not surprised to hear that Lamont's investment portfolio included shares of an evil corporation like Halliburton. I am disgusted that the Lieberman campaign is using THAT of all things as an issue. Not that it isn't relevant, but this really is one of those throwing stones from the lawn of your glass house moments. If the Lieberman campaign had anything to say about how exactly Lieberman is going to change, I might listen. Ok, I probably wouldn't but I sure wouldn't feel this irate.

That quote by Lieberman's spokesperson is a perfect example of what pisses me off about how a campaign like this is run. Issues? Intelligent debate of policy? Hell no! For the incumbent, public talking points tend to be comprised of bullshit, bamboozling, and backhanded insults.

After reading that campaign update, I called my town clerk, found out I can register to vote in the primary up until August 3rd (by mail in presumably) and up until August 7th if I do it in person. So off I go to register (today if I get showered and out in time...still moving slow from the hip).

1 comment:

PFG said...

Yeah, it's not really all that simple. It should be, but it's not. Because you know, terrorists might try to vote! (in fact this is what one town hall official suggested the other day when I made a remark about how a change of one element in a voter's registration should be easier to do and process).

Actually, most of the hoop jumping is supposedly to protect against voter fraud. Seems like there should be a better way though.

Primaries have some extra hoops associated with them since they are about who gets the party nomination/designation. If a candidate doesn't win the primary, I believe s/he can still run but s/he will not get all the perks, e.g. financial backing of party associated slush funds (cf. Tom DeLay scandal). Also, in the case of my US Senator, even if he wins the primary, a strong showing by the challenger sends a message to him and to the DNC that they need to change their tune for the 2008 presidential race.

As I understand it, only people who have registered to vote as THAT PARTY designation (i.e., in this case, registered to vote with Democrat affiliation - there's a place on the registration form where you can select "democrat" "republican" or "other") have a say in the primary election for that party.

There are all kinds of annoying deadlines on eligibility for a primary...probably for a general election too...I never ran into those (yet) though. Things like "Deadline to transfer party enrollment (i.e. Republican to Democrat) was May 8, 2006" and "Mailed change of registration from unafflliated to Democrat must be postmarked by August 3, 2006"


I have no idea what happens if someone who is a registered voter but doesn't meet all the specific (to primary) requirements tries to vote in that primary. I may in fact find out since the town clerk made what should have been the quite simple job into a bit of a mess (she had pen issues, tips and advice on filling out the form - most of which I think were based on her own personal preferences and speculation, and as I said above, there were words about 9/11 and the 2000 presidential election "irregularities"). I have some reason to doubt whether my form will in fact be processed in a timely manner.