Voting

[ckd]

hr_macgirl and I voted in the Massachusetts primary at just before 1800, and were ballots #612 and #613 at our polling location, which was busy but not packed; there were empty booths, of about a dozen total (I think; I didn't count). For the uncontested special election [ETA: last May] to fill our vacant state Senate seat, we were #22 and #23...and voted sometime around 1830-1900.

As unenrolled voters, we got to choose which party ballot to take, and both of us took D ballots. As we were walking to the booths, we heard the staff say "we need more Democratic ballots".

Comments

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

I've been thrilling to see the great interest in the Dem primary campaign, but the real election wonks say it's terrible, because the lack of an early front-runner means the campaigns are burning money and time not fighting the Republicans--they seem convinced that if it goes long past Super Tuesday, McCain's going to win. The case where most primary votes don't matter at all is actually what you want.

Another reason to think there's something deeply wrong with the system, though I'm not sure what the answer is.

[weirdquark]

I've seen a theory given that it gives Clinton and Obama an advantage over McCain because they're still going out and trying to get new people to vote for them, thus increasing voter turnout in favor of the Democrats. (Assuming the supporters of whomever doesn't get the nomination don't decide to sit at home, which I really hope doesn't happen.)

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

Of course, the emergence of an overwhelming Democratic frontrunner with a fabled aura of electability long before Super Tuesday, giving plenty of time to fight the good fight for the general election, was... exactly what happened in 2004. Let's see if I can recall how that went.