of constitutional officers run as Independents and will be able to continue to do so.  Many of them are Democrats in Republican areas or Republicans in Democratic areas; that's why they run as Independents.  As long as one runs as one's party's nominee, I don't see how this can hurt Democrats.  Those of us who run as Dems or Repubs will continue to do so.

Sharing info with voters (like how a candidate got on their ballot, i.e. party affiliation) is a good thing.

Party affiliation is the most important factor for many people in making their decision, especially down ballot.  How many people actually know that much about the candidates for Soil Conservation Board or County Clerk, other than what party they belong to? 2%?

Plus, think of all the paper we'd save not having to print those friggin' sample ballots!

I want to know Party affiliation.To me this tells me who gets what kind of treatment and how they are responded too. Every time I run into a problem of slowness or failure to respond I find that they are off a different party then I. As far I am concerned most Republicans have a piss poor attitude and do not give a shit about people.

One can usually tell what party an elected official has in their private life by the way they perform the human side of their job. I have found this in County Lawyers, Commonwealth Attorneys, Sheriffs, Commissioner of Revenue, Supervisor and Treasurer.

Recently a petition was presented to our BOS about Payday Loans. The Republican and Independant leaning Republican both voted against the petition. Later on in an email I recieved from the R supervisor about his vote this is what I received.

"This is one politician that will not change his vote.  If people are too stupid to read what they sign then they ones who keep these places in business".

This is a piss poor attitude and reflects Republican thinking as a whole. So yes I want to know the party of anyone running. And if they run as an Independant I want to know the crowd they run with outside of the work place.

Recently in the sheriffs race a Republican ran as an Independant and did solely because Republicans have a hard time winning as a Republican in Nelson County. Every Republican sheriff in the past was NO DAM GOOD. I must say he ran a clean race, but the people backing him were bums. One R deputy lost his job, because of lies about the Democratic candidate that reflected on the present Sheriff and the department. This deputy ran a half page ad in the newspaper. Now the big question is did he do it with the candidates, behind the scene backing???

Both of these arguments are not only weak, they presume the voters are not very smart.

1. Which constitutional officer gets to vote on issues like abortion?

2. Do you really thing voters don't already know who was nominated by which party? I mean, it is something that is already available on the SBE website, and the newspapers generally carry that information and identify the candidates by party. As Ingrid said, those who are in tough areas already run as independents and do not pursue the party's nomination.

Downballot races are hard enough, particularly in the case such as Norfolk's where the elections occur at the same time as the gubernatorial races. Anything that helps the candidate should be considered.

By the way: in my earlier piece, which you linked to, I offered two alternatives: remove the party from the nomination process (i.e., everyone runs as an independent) or put party affiliation on the ballot. Since the first seems unlikely, the latter just makes sense.

Sounds naive to me.

How many voters go to the SBE web site?

How many Newspapers research an Independant and publish where their funds are coming from?

When one witnesses an Independant candidate going into a wealthy Republicans estate do you really believe he is going there to visit? Especially after that visit his campaign has all kinds of money.

Apparently you have never researched Watkins Abbitt?

Reasons I have read so far are extremely Liberal Naive thoughts or Republicans Spinning.

Look at the House on Wednesday. Bill wanted open Government in Sub-Committees, but was defeated by Republicans.

Are you saying it should be hidden that party affiliation was not the reason?

In the last election cycle in Prince William County, popular incumbent Republican Sherriff Glendell Hill was challenged for the GOP nomination because he didn't hold the party line on issues like abortion and gun control (both issues the constitutional office of sheriff can't do anything about).

That said, I would really rather see us go the route of your first suggestion--remove the party from these races all together.

I can't stand it when a Democrat insists on calling themselves "Independent" for purely political purposes, it helps them at the expense of the party.  

is a differant story.

I would never want to stop anyone from running for office, so when the party platform is full, they have no choice but to run as an Independant. BUT to choose to run as an Independant when their party platform is not full, then they are just dishonest people and should be exposed for their dishonesty.

And Yes one party will be hurt, but that is life.

Instead of worrying about the party affiliation, how about looking at why we even elect some of these constitutional offices.  In municipalities with poice departments, why elect a sheriff?  Even in small jurisdictions, electing the Sheriff really seems to be an anachronism.  Commissioner of the Revenue?  Again, in times past this position was elected so s/he could be held accountable.  In the modern age, is this really necessary?

Let's look at whether it makes sense to have these as elected offices at all.

If we keep them elected positions, maybe it would be better all around to put them in the same class as School Board elections--all candidates are independents who may be endorsed by a party but aren't selected by the party.