Congressman David Davis May Fight Democrat Intervention
Jake Jost has a good piece over at WBIR’s Knoxville Talks on the David Davis presser released yesterday.
He doesn’t think Davis’s challenge looks too strong. My initial response is the same based on my understanding of the open primary process. Has that process ever been challenged in Tennessee? I don’t know.
We interviewed Congressman Davis on our radio program on election day and at that time, he was very concerned about the Democrats being so open in their support and electioneering for Roe. He mentioned the emails, the reports of phone calls, etc. to us on air many hours before the polls closed.
Hardball politics, I thought. It taints Roe’s bona fides, in my opinion. But illegal? I didn’t think so.
But Congressman Davis raises an interesting point in his presser: this case.
California Democratic Party vs. Jones hinges on freedom of association. Could Davis challenge based on that angle? Would he sue, or would a supporter need to sue? I’m no lawyer. But I think there is merit to Davis pressing forward whether he loses the Congressional seat or not.
Should I be allowed to go vote in a Democrat Primary? It’s allowed. And hard-core Dem activists crossed over and voted for McCain in two elections, we know that. Maybe the day has finally come to address the issue and maybe Davis is the guy to git-r-done.
The primary process is a selection of the party’s candidate. Truthfully, I don’t see why taxpayers should finance the election of the two respective party candidates. But I digress.
If Davis has evidence of actual Democrat leadership or automated calls financed by identified Dems and if he has evidence of Dem leadership that voted and then is continuing to serve in Dem leadership, he has a very real case.
I’ll be watching. And by the way, if you have any information on the race, call David Davis at: 423-773-8861.
Lt. Governor Ramsey has said David Davis needs to just pipe down and move on along. I’m not so sure, Speaker Ramsey. If settling the political dust is the goal, then yes. But if cleaning up the system or making it better is an outcome, I say “CHARGE!!” to Congressman Davis.
Congressman Davis says in his presser:
In addition, there was a campaign to encourage Democratic party members to vote in the
Republican primary and to vote against Congressman Davis. Evidence we have obtained
includes:
· Robocalls conducted in violation of both federal and state law the night before the primary
sent to the homes of Democrats encouraging them to vote in the GOP primary and to vote for
anyone but Congressman Davis.
· Emails to Democrats encouraging them to vote in the Republican primary.
· Reports that current and former Democratic party officials voted in the Republican primary.
· Known Democratic activists actively campaigning for Phil Roe.
By the way, a Democrat who lost by a slim margin may be challenging the process as well.
UPDATE, Friday August 15: Congressman Davis announced he won’t press on with a challenge. Thank you for your service, Congressman! Good luck and best wishes from the Franks.
8 Comments so far
Leave a comment
[...] Terry Frank becomes on of the few voices encouraging Rep. David Davis to continue to fight his unfavorable election result and mount a challenge to Tennessee’s open primary system: Lt. Governor Ramsey has said David Davis needs to just pipe down and move on along. I’m not so sure, Speaker Ramsey. If settling the political dust is the goal, then yes. But if cleaning up the system or making it better is an outcome, I say “CHARGE!!” to Congressman Davis. [...]
By Burning Down Tennessee’s Open Primary : Post Politics: Political News and Views in Tennessee on 08.14.08 9:19 am
Terry -
First, love the billboards! Great locations, and very eyecatching!
Second, I have no sympathy for Davis. CDP v. Jones cuts against his arguments as much as it helps him. If he didn’t like the open primary system, he had how many terms in the General Assembly to do something about it? Plus, where were his objections last time when Venable wanted a recount?
I’ve read Finney’s petition, and, while I generally detest recounts, he might have some issues. To say that machines malfunctioned, that the Election Commission operated in a biased/bumbling fashion, or that counting errors occurred are all valid reasons for a recount. To say that people who cannot be identified voted in an uncertain way and perhaps voted in this race for an uncertain candidate is not a valid reason.
At least it isn’t in my opinion.
Cheers,
Rob
By Rob Huddleston on 08.14.08 5:08 pm
After all the lies and misrepresentions that Davis made during the campaign, the only thing I have to say is “what goes around, comes around.” By the way
Davis is a perfect example of you can’t judge a book by it’s cover.
By Larry C. on 08.14.08 9:11 pm
I understand, gentlemen. And great to hear from you, Rob. The Democrat in the Kurita matchup honestly has a better chance of making the argument because the margin was so much closer than Davis vs. Roe. And like I said, Davis has to decide what his goals are.
As Jake Jost said over at WBIR, Davis has got a better chance of raising the issue if he submits any recordings or proof that he has to the media.
Setting David Davis aside, do you believe the ability to crossover is a problem?
I’m looking at our Presidential Primary process, for instance, New Hampshire, the entire arrangement or order, etc. Do we ever do something about it? Or is the problem negligible?
By Terry on 08.15.08 5:41 am
“Setting David Davis aside, do you believe the ability to crossover is a problem?”
Only for the Big Two. If we the people are having to pay to put on their club elections, why shouldn’t you be able to vote where you want? You can’t participate in both the club elections, but you have to pay for both of them.
I see the primaries as mostly a defensive, self-preservation effort by the parties – or maybe a finger in the wind – a focus group at the taxpayer’s expense. A majority of low voter turnout determines the “direction” of a party – at least temporarily, until the general campaign begins. The party counts on the losing primary voter to “take one for the team” in the general, even though the party’s new temporary “direction” may not be where the voter wants to go. But again, it is about self-preservation of the party. Voting in defense-mode – to not let the other guy win.
Cross-overs in primaries are the same thing. You are only setting up the “opponent” to be really worse than “your guy”. If the Big Two would actually bring someone to vote FOR, rather than just pointing to the other side and saying “vote against that”, I don’t think the cross-over would even be an issue.
However, it isn’t about anything but preserving the club. I am not taking one for the team.
By Eric Holcombe on 08.15.08 12:06 pm
Mr.Davis is a typical politician. If mr. Davis had represented the First District as he should have, then the primay would have given victory. I served my country to help insure people the right to vote as they choose. I am sure many in the first district regret we elected Mr.Davis the first time. After this scam Mr.Davis will not get elected for any office. Mr.Davis would do well to go home and count his “booty” and shut up.
By Jerry Crawford on 08.15.08 12:14 pm
Good points, Eric. But I did say above that I don’t think the taxpayers should be financing the primaries. Your stated objections are the reason why.
By Terry on 08.15.08 1:06 pm
Mr. Crawford—I don’t know if it is “scam” to question Democrat intervention.
By Terry on 08.15.08 1:08 pm
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>