That’s yard’s just a clue that a one issue voter lives there and feels very strongly about the issue as a reminder to voters of both parties who may be passing by. It’s probably a futile gesture but is not a stupid gesture.
If yesterday’s poll is correct, that’s absolutely true.
But I think the average single-issue voting right-to-lifer’s default behavior is to pull a Republican ballot. If I’m Lipinski I’m hoping for a Tribune poll this week that shows Rauner is blowing Ives out. Better to convince hardcore pro-lifers their vote will matter more in his Dem primary.
My wife told me about this guy. Those are lit 5×8s. I’ve also seen a Kaegi and Ives house.
The people I feel bad for are the next door neighbors who have competing Newman and Ives signs. Must make the annual block party a little bit awkward.
- Louis G Atsaves - Wednesday, Mar 7, 18 @ 10:40 am:
When I was GOP Township Chair in my area which included most of the People’s Republic of Highland Park, we had roughly 6-8 homes that had competing signs from different political parties, usually 10th Congressional. Usually a husband-wife divide.
“I think we should have to be a member of a party to vote in a primary. I am a Democrat and could walk into polling station and get a Republican primary ballot.”
The primary ballot that you pull determines your party, e.g. if you pull a Republican ballot, under Illinois law, you are a Republican. Cullerton v. Du Page County Officers Electoral Board, 384 Ill. App. 3d 989 (2008)
I guess the once widely accepted notion that both parties can and should be big tents is over, huh?
- Six Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Mar 7, 18 @ 10:48 am:
Actually, the argument of “people should be able to vote in both primaries” is not too far off the mark, since both major parties have worked to institutionalize themselves unto state and federal government, and thus they owe “we the people” a greater role in shaping their policies and people. Some states allow cross voting by nonpartisan blanket primaries.
@ Responsa Lip is not simply pro-life, he is very socially conservative. I am all for a big tent but being anti-marriage equality and anti-immigrant, combined with anti-abortion is just too far right. Maybe if Lip were charming and impressive in other respects, many of his liberal constituents would accept his outdated policies. Lip seems like a nice man and a strong Catholic but it is hard to dub him a good rep unless you embrace his pro-life and anti-ACA record.
Ron, for a primary election in Illinois, when you just show up at the polling place on election day and choose which party’s primary you want to participate in, you have become a member of that party until the next primary election.
The open general election gives us as citizens the chance to vote for individual candidates from either party, or several parties, who most closely align with our beliefs and needs, then. The closed primary gives parties the best chance to decide what they stand for at that particular time in the context of their long term economic focus– and which party candidates best reflect both that and appeal to the shorter term interests of their respective bases.
Clearly those are very Pro Life Homes. They’re also in an area where they’ve been conditioned to work the ballot from bottom to top. Neither Jeanne nor Dan are more Pro Life than the other. The regular GOP voters will vote for Jeanne. The regular Dem voters will vote for Dan. They’re mostly shrewd enough there to know they can’t vote for both.
If you’re R, Ives. If you’re D, Lipinski. I’d proffer it will have no effect in which primary vote anyone takes. Or very few.
That could be my yard, if there were only more weeds and lawn cigars, and if the signs said “Keep off the grass”.
The signs reflect the homeowner’s philosophy. But if they’re smart, they’ll pull a D ballot and vote for Dan; otherwise they’d simply be wasting their vote, Ives has zero chance of winning the general.
=== I am not a member of either party, so if you close primaries you are taking away my vote. ===
If you want to vote in a primary election for any candidates, not just for referendums, then you must declare a party. That declaration makes you a member of the party you choose. Illinois primaries are open in the sense that voters may freely change their party preference from one election to the next without having to first change registration.
The primary election reform that would increase voter turnout is to keep voters’ party preference as secret as their candidate preference. Most voters like that idea, but party leaders hate it.
For those who feel that you have to be a member of a party to be able to vote in a primary, please tell me how you would prove that at the polling place? Would you have to show a party card? If so, would that card have had to be purchased by membership dues in the party? Both of those would be illegal. One would be Voter ID, and the other could possibly be considered a Poll Tax.
I drive by this house every day (man we all live closer to one another than we realize). I’m calling that dude for Ives - just giving Dan the right wing seal of approval I guess. He had a Trump flag flying from a flagpole last year and then, oddly, an Australian flag shortly after Trump’s Australia phone gaffe.