RPV revealed the final version of the 2016 Loyalty Oath, requiring any voter seeking participation in the 2016 Virginia Republican Presidential Primary to sign a pledge acknowledging they are in fact, a Republican.
This tool, which does virtually nothing to generate voter data or metrics, while doing everything to prevent or refuse potential primary voters, and turn away Republicans, is the latest bone-headed idea from RPV. I know, I know, after this past weekend we’re all ‘united’. I think it’s safe to say we’re united behind electing Republicans, but those in party leadership aren’t necessarily with the times on how exactly we should go about achieving that.
Despite their trumpeting of 13 candidates qualifying for the Virginia ballot this year, up from a whopping 2 in 2012, and despite their boasting of more than 100,000 voters signing petitions for people to be on that ballot, RPV has designed a way to turn away Republican-leaning voters at the polls. It also will discourage participation in the Republican primary; an easily imaginable scenario is an independent refusing to sign a worthless piece of paper, so instead deciding to vote in the Democratic primary. Let’s also keep in mind that every poll in Virginia identifies (roughly), 33D, 34R, 33I, give or take one or two. So with this Loyalty Oath, we’re turning away up to 33% of the electorate who may be willing to vote for a Republican in November.
This means no data generated from independents, utilizing primary info that helps the Party and nominee identify potential voters for the general. That means no mail, phone calls, door knocking, nada. Based on 2012 primary numbers, roughly 253,000 people voted in the Republican primary. If we had implemented a loyalty pledge, we’d push nearly 9000 people out of voting in a Republican primary. But let’s look at 2008, the last lame-duck White House, and most similar to our current situation, and numbers get really scary:
489,000 voters.
If we had implemented a Loyalty Oath then:
161,000+ voters would be refused participation. That’s TEN percent of what John McCain received in the general.
Tell our nominee’s campaign, or the RNC that we were unable to generate up-to-date voter metrics and data on independents in the general, and at-worst ten percent of our likely voters because we had to have this Loyalty Oath! Heads are going to explode, as they should.
The last time this bone-headed idea came about, RPV came to their senses in 2012, after becoming a laughingstock. In the Year of Trump, where a third-party run gives Republican leadership heart palpitations, loyalty oaths have become all the rage, so RPV is able to bypass the (justified) media backlash that occurred in 2011 and 2012.
Let’s let RPV respond, with their memo from November:
The benefits of this statement are twofold. First, this Statement provides us with a huge opportunity to collect data. As you will notice there is an optional line for email addresses. A similar process was used in the 10th Congressional District canvass in 2014, it yielded over 9,000 email addresses that instantly benefited not only our Party but also our nominee. The statement has the potential to add tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of email addresses for the Party and our nominee.
Second, while that Statement if very broadly construed, it will hopefully deter Democrats from participating in our primary process. Without party registration, preventing Democrats from voting in a state run primary is nearly impossible. Given the critical nature of the 2016 elections, it is imperative to ensure every measure is taken to ensure Republican voters select our Republican nominee and I agree.
Let’s address collecting data. The cutest thing about this newly revealed Loyalty Oath is the optional requirement for putting your email address down on your pledge. However, while your signature and printed name are required, your email, understandably, is not. This laughable idea that a conservative or Republican-leaning voter is going to voluntarily supply the GOVERNMENT with their email address is just bad. The differences in the 10th District and 2014 is that a canvass is a party-run function, while the 2016 Presidential is run by the State. This was clearly added as a half-assed attempt to justify this latest example of voter suppression: “No guys, it will help us identify voters for the general, people will put their emails down and we add a million people to our list!” (I actually wrote that line before reading the memo, and shockingly, exactly as predicted – D.J.)
As far as deterring Democrats, if they want to vote, they’re going to. A worthless Loyalty Oath does nothing to deter them, nothing to prevent them, and nothing to stop them from doing it again. If RPV wanted to take this issue seriously, it would round up a collection of delegates and senators and work to pass closed primaries. There’s THIRTEEN candidates on the ballot, we’re talking about someone who is going to win Virginia with 20% of the vote! If we’re that worried about Democrats ‘selecting our Republican nominee’ then let’s go back to 2012 when the ballot requirements made candidates have to work for access, rather than the free-for-all we have now. But please be serious, a piece of people isn’t stopping anyone.
It’s a bad idea. It was a bad idea in 2011, it’s a bad idea now. I’ve been a Republican my entire life, hell, I literally have a Republican elephant tattooed on my right wrist, and I’m contemplating not participating because of this nonsense. RPV continues two steps forward, five steps back, and in the mean time, we handicap our elected officials and most importantly our candidates, preventing them from Victory, or making it that much more difficult for them.
Reagan’s coalition inspiration was a Big Tent. I don’t think he made everyone sign in while demanding their loyalty on a piece of paper at the door.
