I hope you do not think me a complete traitor to turn my back on my own, dear historical party, dearest sister in Christ! There's a method to my madness, coming under two heads:
(1) No way the GOP is entitled to depend on me, if I cannot depend on it.
(2) There is a certain electoral flexibility in Massachusetts to non-party types; i.e. people who are "unenrolled," or not affiliated with a particular political party.
It only comes into play in primary elections — whether for governor, senator, or congressman. In Massachusetts primaries, a registered Republican must vote the Republican ballot. A registered Democrat must vote the Democrat ballot. An unenrolled — independent — voter, however, may request whichever ballot he prefers to vote.
I can envision a primary situation where there's a strong Republican contender who, facing other Republican challengers, doesn't seem to need any particular help from me — in the primary, at least. The Democrat primary, however, may feature various candidates of different strengths. I might choose the Dem primary ballot to vote for the second-strongest candidate in the Dem field, thus to weaken the frontrunner of the Dem field — who must face the Republican primary winner in the general election.... Who I would most likely vote for then: There's only one ballot in the general election.
Probably the world cannot be saved by such a strategy. But at least I feel that I, as an American citizen and voter, have a little free "wiggle room" in doing my best to influence elections....
So, whether it be deemed good or ill by others, my change of voter registration to "no-party affiliation" seemed to increase the range of possibilities over which I might have some effect.
At least that is the reason why I did what I did.
Bingo! Boop hits it out of the park . . . again.