Several readers objected to the very idea of strategic voting in the other team’s primary:
Re: what to do about operation chaos, there is only one option — don’t do it. It’s immoral to muck around with elections. Even if the other side does it. I didn’t like it when Rush was promoting it vis a vis Hillary. And as much as it makes my own skin crawl to consider Terry McAuliffe as governor of VA, it’s still not right. If we can’t beat that slimeball legitimately, then shame on us.
I disagree. While open primaries are indeed a mistake, and should be abolished asap, the lefties are responsible for inventing them and so long as the law isn’t violated, we should feel free to vote in them strategically. But as for whom to vote for strategically, opinion is mixed.
On the one hand:
Definitely vote for Moran. He’s already came out against Coal Power in VA, and has attacked the other two candidates on Gun Rights. That won’t fly in a general election.
But on the other hand, this:
I’m also a Virginia resident and have been thinking about the same thing. I thought I might vote for McCauliffe – he’s so deeply unattractive as a human being that I’d think anyone could beat him.
Yah, vote for McAuliffe nomatter how distasteful you find him. He’s the weakest candidate. We’ll crush him. He’s also got the best chance of beating Deeds. Moran’s support has collapses from what I can tell.
Confusion like this is, of course, is the problem with this kind of strategy. (Also, sorry for getting Creigh Deeds’ Christian name wrong. I’ve been having bad luck with names recently!)
Elsewhere: I just noticed Geraghty rejected strategic voting last month, and Matt Lewis at Townhall chews over the issue without coming to a conclusion. This poll shows Moran trailing the other two, but also as the weakest in a matchup against McDonnell.