The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has an editorial in which it discusses the upcoming Democratic convention during which the party will, among other things, select a Secretary of State candidate. Says the Journal Gazette:
The secretary of state nomination is important for the party in several ways. Republicans have a lock on all the statewide elected offices except for Evan Bayh’s U.S. Senate seat, and winning an office in Mitch Daniels’ Statehouse would be not only a boost for the party but help provide a watchdog on the GOP-controlled state government. The incumbent, Todd Rokita, should be vulnerable – he strongly supported an unnecessary voter ID law, and he refused to intervene in problems surrounding voting machines until it became politically expedient to do so.
Joe Pearson of Hartford City is so far the only Democrat to seek the position and is, therefore, the presumptive nominee.
I haven’t seen any polls on the voter id issue (granted I haven’t been looking), but I ‎would guess that most of people support the law. The issue seems to be a good one for ‎rallying the Democrat base; but outside the Democrat party, it’s a non-issue. Frankly, I ‎don’t think most people care either way; if made an issue, I think they will side with ‎the id law. Thus, my prediction is that if Pearson makes this an issue outside of the convention he hands Rokita the ‎election.‎
“Democrat” isn’t an adjective. The proper use is “Democratic”. I’m not normally a huge stickler for grammar, but using “Democrat” as an adjective is something concocted at some point by Republican spinmeisters and always makes me think of someone throwing up gang signs.
My pet peeves aside, I think you’re right. It’s so easy to defend: “What’s wrong with preventing voter fraud? What’s the big deal about having a license?” Since most Hoosiers have licenses, they clearly don’t think it’s a big deal to have to show one at the polls.
To explain the opposition to the Voter ID law, you have to go into a bunch of details. If the other guy has a quick, plausible explanation and you have to spend a bit of time explaining yourself, you’re going to lose.
In any case, the Sec’y of State is responsible for enforcing the election law, not making policy. I think Pearson needs to hammer away at how he will make election systems providers honor their contracts and provide systems that have been verified by the Sec’y of State’s office and at how he will make the office more efficient at quickly verifying voter registrations during peak election situations.
My two cents worth. I’ve always seen the Secretary of State position as something of a glorified notary public. I’m probably just not familiar enough with the duties of the office.
Doug, ‎
I’ve been corrected before and I must say it is an honest mistake. I have no problem ‎‎using the word Democratic.
I freely admit grammar is not forte, and I hope you accept ‎my apology. ‎
No problem. Like I said, it’s just a pet peeve of mine. When I make a fuss about it, the responses are telling. Sometimes, as with you, the usage isn’t that important one way or the other. Having a discussion of a particular issue is what’s important.
Other times, the person gets indignant, and you can usually expect that it’s a political shouting match the person is after.
Doug,
Thanks for wielding the flyswatter on the “democratic (adj.)” issue. I almost did so earlier today but I knew I couldn’t do so without getting too frothy. Not because I’m a registered Democrat (I’m not), but because I’m a member of the radical Proper English Front. ;-)