Thu, 21 April 2016
Harriet Tubman. Yes? No? If not, why not? Greg Dworkin walks us through today’s Abbreviated Pundit Roundup: a second look at NY’s exit polls; what’s next for the Sanders campaign; a look ahead to the upcoming primaries and the TV ads that herald them.
Closing with a reminder from comments in the APR, it’s back to our political science inquiry into process versus substance, the “rules of the game,” how ingrained in both politics and governance various rules sets can be, and even the social dynamics of trying to join in the game itself.
And about that New York party “enrollment” law: how did various members of the Working Families Party feel about the situation? How might it be changed? There are at least three competing bills seeking to shorten that deadline. One seeks to cut it more or less in half, requiring 90 days lead time for changing a voter’s party enrollment. Another proposes cutting it to 25 days. And a third would simply permit registered but unenrolled voters to take the ballot of their choice on primary day. Which is the most progressive? Is that even an applicable term? Consider that the 90 day bill is sponsored by a Senator elected on the Dem/Working Families lines, who endorsed Hillary Clinton, the 25 day bill by Daniel Squadron (who’s taken hits in DK diaries in years past), and the free-choice-for-the-unenrolled bill is by Fred Thiele, a East End Long Island Republican who switched his affiliation to the Independence Party. Tricky!