POWIP Piece of Work In Progress

The Kinston Decision

Small city in NC, Kinston, which hasn't elected a non-Democrat within living memory, attempts to do away with party affiliations on ballots for a couple of local offices. Ballot initiative passes 2:1. Justice Department decides that would be . . . raaaaacist!

In short, it says that blacks need to have a (D) choice if they're to make an informed decision. Because the (D) is the only trademark that makes it clear that blacks are being served. We spoke with Abigail Thernstrom on The B-Cast about this, yesterday. I spoke to Alejandro Miyar, mentioned in the above-linked article, a spokesperson for the DoJ, who said at that time, contrary to what he told CNS, that he'd be willing to answer questions in writing but that it was Department policy not to respond verbally to questions on Section 5.

One of the things that the memo implies is that white crossover voting is a good thing, but black crossover voting is to be discouraged. As Abigail says, "It's demeaning, it's patronizing, it's . . . liberal racism."

Here, on the other hand, is something that the DoJ aren't going to address: "multiple line voting." This example is conspicuous by the presence of fraud, but the idea is that a candidate may, for example, appear as the candidate for a particular office as a Democrat and also, on a separate line, as a Working Families Party candidate, and will receive more votes that way. Nothing wrong with that, right, Baracky?

So, in short, no party affiliation is bad; multiple party affiliation is good. Huh.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts