Some Republicans have editorialized encouraging crossover voting for Michael Cruze in the September primary. According to a Star Tribune interview, Cruze indicated that if he loses the primary, he will support the Republican candidate Joe Gimse over his DFL party's endorsed candidate, Sen. Dean Johnson. I can understand why some Democrats are skeptical, and why some Republicans are salivating at the prospect of ousting Johnson without a general election.
My question, as an independent-thinking Republican, is why is there a need to encourage primary crossover voting for Cruze, especially when the main issues of the Cruze-Gimse campaigns are virtually identical? If they are confident that our endorsed candidate, Joe Gimse, will defeat Johnson in the general election, then why the emphasis on the primary? This tactic makes it appear that the best hope of "defeating" Johnson is by encouraging Republicans to vote for another Democrat, and that does little to bolster confidence in our Republican ticket for November.
Although a block of persons exist who want to remove the senator in any way possible, if Johnson is taken out by primary crossover voting, I think many, regardless of political affiliation, would consider it not to have been a fair contest. Unlike in a general election where we can all vote "for" a candidate, Minnesota's open primary law also allows persons of opposing political views to vote "against" a candidate. Because the current law can negatively affect any candidate, of any political party, perhaps it needs to be reviewed, so the primary process is fair to all candidates.
Rod Vlach
Willmar
