Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

metamorphosis

(25 posts)
39. Ok, yes, & let's consider which TYPE (open, closed, etc.) of primary would be ideal.
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 12:11 PM
Apr 2016

1. we all agree, one imagines, that Oregon leads the way with all voters being registered and able to send in their vote each election. easy, no voter suppression. If they allow independent voters to vote, I'd consider Oregon ideal.

2. There's a big step down from Oregon, although some states do allow same day registration, and are open to independents, and have little or no voter suppression (voter id requirements, etc.).

3. we could/should start a movement among like minded people to make everyone registered to vote once attaining the age of 18, with no other requirements other than registering (open to all). zero voter suppression, all welcome.

4. why are open primaries better than closed primaries? There was once a time when the two parties had 80% of all voters affiliated with one or the other. In such cases, there could be mischief, with thousands of GOP voting in Democrats and wreaking havoc.

5. but non-aligned independent voters now outnumber both dems and reps, and if either party refused to allow independent voters to participate in their primaries, they alienate those indepednent voters, and they squander the opportunity to welcome specific independent voters abord for the next election.

6. in fact, it may turn out to be the party which gets the most independents voting in their primaries that will surge out ahead in upcoming primaires.

7. we could ask all states to schedule primaries if they can afford doing so. If not, a list of practices could be set forth to make any remaining caucuses fair and neutral.

8. demcratic states in the US South should sprinkle their primary dates out more widely so that their influence is so extreme as it has been this year.

I do not care. I want to elect a Democratic candidate. Lol. Seriously? I WANT the decks STACKED seabeyond Apr 2016 #1
The whole system is undemocratic. Bad Dog Apr 2016 #2
...which has nothing to do with the Primary process brooklynite Apr 2016 #21
Really? Bad Dog Apr 2016 #22
Primary elections are the decision of a Party and its members... brooklynite Apr 2016 #37
There's no reason why OMOV can't apply to choosing a presidential candidate. Bad Dog Apr 2016 #41
Been this way for decades and it's only an issue to those who beachbumbob Apr 2016 #3
We aren't a democracy. We're a republic. Makes a difference about your complaint. CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #4
There is a good reason for closed primaries KingFlorez Apr 2016 #5
Closed primaries. Dem voters should decide Dem nominee. JaneyVee Apr 2016 #6
Yep. Stuckinthebush Apr 2016 #9
Ame. n/t MBS Apr 2016 #35
It's democratic to Members of the Democratic party. NobodyHere Apr 2016 #7
It sounds like you are arguing to allow Republicans to vote in Democratic primaries LonePirate Apr 2016 #8
Either open them or distribute them according to the number of registered Democrats n/t Blue Meany Apr 2016 #10
22 states have no party registration. Eric J in MN Apr 2016 #15
I been voting in open primary Indiana for years without any problems. B Calm Apr 2016 #24
I don't want non- union members voting in those elections OKNancy Apr 2016 #11
That would be great limiting primary voters only to union members. Only B Calm Apr 2016 #25
There are people who work and toil within the party for years Tarc Apr 2016 #12
Your missing the point... Blue Meany Apr 2016 #13
"You're" Tarc Apr 2016 #14
Do you support NY state's 6 month freeze on party-switching before the primaries? NT Eric J in MN Apr 2016 #17
Yes, as it minimizes cross-party tomfoolery Tarc Apr 2016 #18
It also minimizes the number of people who join the Democratic Party in an election year. NT Eric J in MN Apr 2016 #19
If those people cannot read and follow simple rules to register by a certain date Tarc Apr 2016 #20
Show evidence of such 'tomfoolery'. It's like Republicans shouting about voter fraud and demanding Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #34
Call the waaaaaambulance ... stat! n/t SFnomad Apr 2016 #16
A closed primary is limiting political freedom, and is right wing authoritarian. B Calm Apr 2016 #23
Correct. What is missing from closed primaries, is the will of the people. -none Apr 2016 #38
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #26
Why the DNC keeps getting away with cramming shitty candidates down our throats. B Calm Apr 2016 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #28
I prefer to stay for spite! B Calm Apr 2016 #29
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #30
I prefer to change rules to the better and grow the democratic base. You B Calm Apr 2016 #31
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #32
If you are a true democrat you would be concerned about B Calm Apr 2016 #33
Unfortunately open primaries let Republicans mess up our elections scepticism Apr 2016 #36
and democrats can mess up their elections. The truth is B Calm Apr 2016 #42
And closed primaries ignore the votes of small i independents. marble falls Apr 2016 #43
Ok, yes, & let's consider which TYPE (open, closed, etc.) of primary would be ideal. metamorphosis Apr 2016 #39
However it is done, each vote should be equal Blue Meany Apr 2016 #40
Open primaries are ripe for manipulation, though. Garrett78 Apr 2016 #44
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Why closed primaries are ...»Reply #39