Did they fully intend to vote democrat before they voted in the republican primaries?

The key point here is that the description has someone voting in party A's primaries for the sole reason of limiting or altering the choice others get to make. "As I intended to do from the beginning" is a key part of the description.

You however are describing I think people voting in the primaries to try and get the candidate they want to vote for into power. When that fails they take a different approach.

> for the sole reason of limiting or altering the choice others get to make.

Isn't that the only reason to vote in a primary? The whole point of a primary election is to choose who becomes your party's official candidate on the ballot for the general election, and the only reason to do that is because it limits or alters the choice that voters get to make.

If John Doe is running, and I want him to win, and I only care about my choice, I'd skip the primary and vote for him in the general. If he doesn't make it onto the ballot, I could write him in. If I vote for John Doe in the primary, it's because I want to affect other voters.

I think there's a crucial distinction between a) participating in a party's primary as a member of that party, generally intending to support that party's candidate, and b) participating in a party's primary, pretending to be a member of that party while actually a member of the opposing party, and having no intention of voting for that party's candidate in the actual election. The latter is dishonest manipulation of the political process, tantamount to sabotage.

I tend to agree, but that's not the same as the bit I quoted. The problem is not that you are trying to affect what other people can or will choose (because that's the whole point of a primary), the problem is that you are subverting the intent of the process, which is to allow members of that particular group to collectively limit their own choices.

Thank you for actually understanding my point. :)