During the recalls and in several state and local elections, both parties have complained about candidates running as spoilers under one party’s banner while actually supporting the agenda or platform of the opposition party.

And now we have Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke who has historically run as a Democrat actively campaigning for Donald Trump and who actually spoke at the Republican National Convention.

Candidates should be required to prove they are actual members of the parties they claim to represent…and election law should reflect that requirement (and no ‘dual citizenship’ allowed either).

12 Responses to Wisconsin Election Laws Need Candidates To Prove They Belong To The Party They Claim to Represent

  1. GuyFromWI says:

    I’m not sure about this one. While some of these instances are problematic, I’m not sure that I agree running in an election should be limited strictly to party members.

    • Ed Heinzelman says:

      I am not suggesting that people can’t run if they aren’t connected to a party. I am suggesting the someone like Sheriff Clarke who is clearly a Republican can’t run as a Democrat which he has done every time he’s been up for election. By all means, everyone who wants to run for office should be able to…but if they don’t belong to a party…they need to run as an independent…and this only applies to partisan elections.

      • GuyFromWI says:

        How would they “prove” it though? A written test or policy statement?

        • Ed Heinzelman says:

          New Hampshire requires candidates for president to show their party membership card. Senator Sanders had to JOIN the party in order to run as a Democrat. Why should this be any different? Currently you only have to file your paperwork with the state or local election office and declare your affiliation. It isn’t that hard.

  2. Dan says:

    I would argue that the primary process is in place to handle exactly this situation.

  3. Mark E. Bye says:

    At a very minimum, WisDems ought to be making some noise about him passing himself off as a Democrat. I don’t know about anyone else, but all I’ve heard are crickets.

    • Jake formerly of the LP says:

      This is the part I don’t understand. Why aren’t Dems calling Clarke a fraud every chance they get? Waiting until 2 months before a low-turnout primary isn’t the time to do it, guys/gals. You lay the groundwork and keep repeating it- that Clarke is a paid-off liar playing a role for angry white conservatives.

  4. Duane12 says:

    Clark’ phony affiliation is an open admission of the current failure of the party of Lincoln and the sheriff’s cowardice to be truthful.. In legal terms, it seems to me he would be guilty of perjury when taking the oath of office under a false pretense.

    Where are the Milwaukee evangelicals; isn’t the devil the father of lies?

    And where is the Journal’s editor or their holier than thou “Christian”? “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” is both moral and a necessity in any communication, but especially in an election

  5. steve says:

    Clarke can prove he’s a Democrat by riding a donkey instead of a horse.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *