Primary season is in full swing, and most of America hasn’t even noticed. Primaries have already been conducted in some states and are imminent in many more. Primaries are the single point in the electoral process where you have the most influence and your vote has the most leverage. During the primaries, not only do relatively few voters participate, but because there are often several candidates for a given office, the votes are spread out, meaning that a very small number of votes can make the difference between winning and losing. Some states run two-stage primaries, holding a runoff between the top vote-getters if no one receives better than 50 percent of the votes cast in the first ballot.
For some unfathomable reason, the National Rifle Association does not grade or endorse candidates in contested primaries. This often contributes to really good, pro-Second Amendment candidates being narrowly defeated, leaving voters in the general election to pick between “bad” and “worse.” Other national rights organizations, such as Gun Owners of America, get involved in primaries, but they have less reach and fewer resources than does the NRA. Many local grass-roots organizations that could have an impact are structured as 501(c) organizations and are forbidden by law from actively participating in electoral politics.
The biggest challenge for groups involved in the primary process is voter apathy. Most Americans pay little attention to politics until the weeks leading up to the general election, and even then, many only pay attention if it is a presidential election year or there is some major controversy driving heavy news coverage and “water-cooler” conversation.
Another challenge of a primary campaign is that it can churn up animosity between members of the same political party and generate fuel for the opposition party to use in the general election. Former President Ronald Reagan’s “Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican” was aimed at minimizing infighting and weakening of the party. That admonition is sound political advice because primaries are decided by the party faithful, and harsh criticism or attack ads are more likely to backfire if those party members perceive them as harmful to individual candidates or the party as a whole.
The most misleading and destructive concept in primary season is the idea of “electability.” This idea revolves around two misguided concepts:
- that the base will always support the candidate, even if they don’t agree with his positions on certain issues; and
- that capturing the votes of “moderates” and independents is the key to winning general elections.
What these flawed assumptions fail to account for is the impact and power of an excited and activated base. Milquetoast candidates do not excite or activate the base – and they often alienate important segments of the base. If a candidate can’t excite the base of his own party, how is he expected to win the confidence of the independents and “moderates” of the other party? Encouraging people to base their votes not on a candidate’s qualifications or political philosophy, but rather on their appeal to “the middle” is a call to mediocrity and ultimate failure.
The Democrats have firmly established themselves as the party of gun control, while the Republicans have defaulted to being the party of not supporting gun control. Only third parties like the Libertarians and the Constitution Party have come out strongly as actually supporting the individual right to arms, and, unfortunately, in most cases, their candidates truly are unelectable because they simply don’t have the base to compete with the two major parties.
Democrats who support gun rights usually don’t have much choice in general elections, but they have the power to shift that landscape by actively recruiting and supporting pro-rights candidates in primaries.
Republicans have more opportunity to vote for pro-rights candidates, but too often the strongest rights supporters fall to the “electability” fallacy in the primaries. Clashes between the Republican establishment and the conservative wing of the party have ruffled a lot of feathers. The addition of the tea party to the mix, often sponsoring wild-card candidates to challenge wishy-washy, establishment incumbents, has further confused the matter. Some of these candidates are in the race solely as spoilers, intended to shake up the establishment and push the incumbent toward more conservative positions; others are serious, viable candidates who deserve consideration by voters.
Regardless of the role the candidate is playing, though, the rule of thumb for you as a voter – especially in the primaries – should always be to vote for the candidate who best represents your beliefs and philosophy. If enough people agree with you, your candidate will move on to a run-off or the general election; if not, at least you added your voice to the chorus expressing support for that candidate’s views, and that might result in some refocusing of the philosophy of the winner. The sad reality is that if you don’t get involved in your party’s primary and cast your vote for the candidate you believe would do the best job in office – rather than the one someone says (or you believe) is better situated to be elected – then you are likely to be left with only a choice for the lesser of two evils come November.
Right now you have a chance to have an impact on the choices that will be available this November. Of course, I’m hoping that every race in the general election will be a choice between the pro-rights Republican and the pro-rights Democrat; what’s most important to you? Learn about your candidates, cast your vote in accordance with your beliefs, and work hard for the candidate that best represents your views. We are actively compiling candidate information at www.GunVoter.org and have posted a link to the congressional primary schedule in the Alerts area on the site. We invite you to visit, share your knowledge, ask questions, and get involved.
Media wishing to interview Jeff Knox, please contact [email protected].
|
|
