In recent weeks, the rule that is getting the most attention is the early deadline for voters who are registered but want to switch or join parties.

It's the SCOTUS ruling that affirmed that political parties are semi-private organizations which have the ability to set their own rules for their nominating process. Otherwise, any outside force could storm a party, take it over, and render its original purpose meaningless.

(Progressives don't like talking about this because it's exactly, literally and truly, how they lost the Republican Party to conservatives back in the 60s.)

Screw any new blood. That is a threat to the power of the base.

If not, you won't. But at least you won't be sponging off of OUR hard work and efforts any more, and as an added bonus, we won't have to listen to you whine all fucking day about how "rough" you have it, being asked to register in advance.

I'm a lifelong Democrat, and proud of it. The stupidity of our current leaders disenfranchising voters who don't live and breath politics, or who may not be fully literate, or who may just be joining the political process, is frankly astounding.

Why would you want to turn away new members of the party?

I'm not advocating open primaries. Not even same-day registration (though I think that is the best solution), but when you put up hurdle after hurdle to join your party, most folks say "fuck-it" and become the independents party leaders both covet and look down their noses upon.

Want to grow the party? Make it easier to to join.

Scared of change (i.e., the definition of "conservative" in the classical sense), by all means, continue on the same course. And continue to become more irrelevant.

...the ONLY thing you have to do is mark a box that says "Register as a Democrat". Everyone is welcome to join and become involved in decision-making about candidates and Party policies. The problem is that some people DON'T want to join the Party, but still want to have a voice in it's decisions.

That pretty much says - Go Away.

If you wanted to "send a message" that you didn't want to have anything to do with political parties, congratulations; you have.

It is a more reasonable one-week for never-registered voters

Still too long.

And I'm not turning away "new members of the party." I'm turning away outsiders who have done nothing for the party, who have decided on a whim that they want to steal our party, and basically co-opt the brand and organization that our time and effort has built. They don't want to become Democrats in the first place, so why would I cater to them?

And let me be frank about this: If someone is too fucking stupid to go learn the rules, that is their problem. It's not "voter fraud," it's not "disenfranchisement," it's "this person is too fucking stupid to be left unsupervised." And they can solve their own problem by educating themselves about their state. You don't have to "live and breath politics" to be aware of the voting rules within the state you choose to live.

If you are not fully up to speed on the laws and regulations, deadlines, etc., then you are effectively disenfranchised.

The state doesn't make a voter into a lazy half-assed citizen. That's all on the voter. The voter still has the RIGHT to participate, even if they don't also have the intelligence to follow the rules.

I am eligible to participate because I met the deadline. I met the deadline because I educated myself on my state's rules and took action based on those rules.

And you wonder why we don't want our party turned over to such ignorant voters? Seriously? Now I KNOW you're not a Democrat.

10 minutes after the polls closed and cried about being "effectively disenfranchised" because you still want to vote dammit.

"How dare they not be biased toward BS"

got it . . . but fully expected

six months in advance.

Same day voter registration has been widely successful in implementation and in bringing in new voters.

There is no good reason not to have same day registration.

For this election new voters had until March 25th to register.

I concede 6 months is too long but it is currently the rule and has been for some time

The concern is making it easier for new voters to become engaged.

I have no doubt in my mind that should BS be winning, the whining would be nonexistent.

New voters had until late March to register. While not as convenient as same day registration, the 3-4 week is not an unusual one.

The concern is from all of the Independents and voters from other parties who did not meet the October registration deadline. They are the ones raising a ruckus, albeit a deserved one.

25 year NY voter here, never had any problems.

But Bernie losing means it can't be fair right?

do not favor stinger voting rights. Are you opposed to same day registration? If so, why?

But it's amusing how Berniecrats have suddenly decided voting is a problem.

In New York.


Do you know NYC's voter participation rate? I believe we lead the country. If not we are close.

Go fix Vernont.

I still have zero issue with the rules, but I'm not sure your statement is accurate.

But the system we have keeps us blue.


Bernie fans are talking crazy.

New York City hit a historic low in voter turnout last November, but the latest report from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission makes it clear that as voter turnout crisis extends across New York State. After each federal election, the EAC collects data from election administrators around the country about voter registration and turnout for the best comparison for how states stack up against each other. New York routinely ranks near the bottom for turnout in EAC reports, and 2014 was no different. The state trailed the rest of the nation, ranking 46th for voter turnout among the citizen voting age population (CVAP). An abysmally low 29.1% of citizens age 18 or over cast a ballot last November – only slightly better than the 20% who turned out in New York City. New York can and should do more to encourage civic participation among voters — starting with reforming our outdated, restrictive election laws.
http://www.nyccfb.info/media/blog/new-york-state-near-bottom-voter-turnout-rankings

NY is in the bottom 5 States for voter participation. You are completely incorrect about NY's turnout. Some of the worst in America and in free fall for years now. Shameful.

Yes, NY is a hidebound and unnecessarily bureaucratic state in many ways, including its approach to voter registration.

Yes, Benie Sanders supporters have an annoying tendency to assign his primary losses to factors which have nothing to do with his weaknesses as a candidate and HRC's strengths.

do not disproportionately hurt minority voters.

Ergo not the same problem as Georgia or Mississippi.

Bureaucratic? Hell yes. Welcome to New York!!!

Report shows just 29 percent of eligible voters cast ballots
http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-local/article/New-York-s-2014-voter-turnout-49th-best-in-the-US-6146753.php

My State, also closed Primary and our turnout rates are more than double those of NY. I'd be ashamed to be a NY Democrat with those numbers.

I haven't found it myself, but perhaps you can find the turnout from 2008, which would better present your case.

NY Primary.
"Similarly, in 2008, only 19 percent of New York voters participated in the primary ahead of that year's presidential election. "
http://www.bustle.com/articles/155342-new-york-primary-voter-turnout-should-worry-bernie-sanders-heres-why

NY has low turnout. Always. No matter the office, the cycle, the candidate or the issue. It's consistent, habitual and not explicable by saying 'Hillary' or 'Bernie' or 'Closed Primary'.

Lots of information here at the NYC Campaign Finance Board
http://www.nyccfb.info/media/blog/new-york-state-near-bottom-voter-turnout-rankings

Turnout in 2008 was lower than 2014. See what I mean? Habitual, consistent, systemic low turnout. That's NY.

As I said, I couldn't find the information quickly at the time and I wanted a proper apples/apples comparison.

thought it would look better, but it's actually worse. I see NYers in this thread who claim NY has the highest turnout in the country! Delusional. Entirely delusional. Not informed about their own State.

Yet you're all heightened aggressive in your posting here. Chill.

any 'Blue State' and that's consistently true, year in and year out. 2014 NY had 29% turnout. NYC only had 20% turnout. My State of Oregon had more than double NY's turnout. Our Primary is also a closed Primary.
In the 2014 election NYC Democratic turnout was average 11% of eligible Democratic voters. You should be embarrassed by that.

New York State Near Bottom in Voter Turnout Rankings
"New York City hit a historic low in voter turnout last November, but the latest report from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission makes it clear that our voter turnout crisis extends across New York State. After each federal election, the EAC collects data from election administrators around the country about voter registration and turnout for the best comparison for how states stack up against each other. New York routinely ranks near the bottom for turnout in EAC reports, and 2014 was no different. The state trailed the rest of the nation, ranking 46th for voter turnout among the citizen voting age population (CVAP). An abysmally low 29.1% of citizens age 18 or over cast a ballot last November – only slightly better than the 20% who turned out in New York City. New York can and should do more to encourage civic participation among voters — starting with reforming our outdated, restrictive election laws."
http://www.nyccfb.info/media/blog/new-york-state-near-bottom-voter-turnout-rankings

But but, it's all fine!!!!

Are you opposed to same day voter registration?

First time voter registration is a whole other subject with its own issues unrelated to this.

not registering new voters, right? That these are separate topics?

seems to be the Bernista strategy here.

Butthurt cuz they're gonna lose bad. I'm off to vote for Hil right now.

Somehow I got the word to change my registration from IND to DEM in October.

It's like a post in LBN that's about topic A suddenly wants to make it about topic Z and you're like, wtf? Stay on target.

[img][/img]

The primaries are unlike the general election. They are designed to let the semi private clubs vote for the candidates who will best represent their party. As a citizen of an open primary state we have planned, intentional crossover voting to introduce chaos in the GOP. It is a strategy used quite often and, sometimes, with successful outcomes. I've seen it used on the Democrats as well here.

I envy closed primary states because that is one less variable the parties have to worry about. New York has closed primaries and a long-standing tradition of making people declare which party they belong to. I applaud this. If a non-Democratic candidate and his or her non-Democratic supporters know that they have to register for a party (which they do in New York), then they need to be organized enough to get out the registration as well as the vote.

Same day voter party identification is as useless as open primaries in my opinion. It allows for chaos introduced by cross-over voters with bad intent.

I think that the difference between primary voting which is used by party members to determine who should represent their party, and general election voting which is used to determine the leaders of the country, state, and localities, has been glossed over. I'm ok with parties determining who represents them in each state the way the party wants to do it.

And, yes, I think that if the majority of voters hate the way the party determines their candidate then they will make their anger known in the general. As it stands, I think most New York Democrats are ok with the way their party is running the primary.

...is an embarrassment and no one should be OK with it. If you're going to have a closed primary, that isn't an issue. What is an issue is cutoff dates 6 months before a vote.

Maybe something needs to be changed but I would bet this is how the process evolved.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

...and I understand the intent. I just don't think the deadline should be before any national exposure of all the candidates in the form of televised town halls or debates.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[img][/img]

How did I manage to get informed enough to change my registration 6 months ago so I could vote for Bernie?

Then his supporters made me change my mind. Middle schoolers are more mature and less butthurt.

...I wish more people had that same opportunity.

would be informed.

It was widely publicized.

Everyone has that "opportunity" equally.

If you can't be bothered to be informed how much do I want you voting? Hmmmm.

"I figured out the registration process, so should everyone else"

Who cares if it has a disparate impact on disadvantaged minorities - I got mine!

And minority voters aren't complaining. You're spinning a false comparison.

They support Hillary 2 to 1.

You're sad because white liberals weeny smart enough to change their registrations in time. Most highly educated.

Fail.

Some say it was invented there (though folks from Chicago would argue the point).

But, no point confusing you with facts.

That's the same rhetorical trick right wingers play when they insist the KKK was a democratic group.

It was.

NY is one of the bluest states in the union. It will stay that way.

Bernie is losing bad so I understand the whining but give me a break.

NY is last in the country in reformation of voting laws.

Our congressional and state delegations are some of the most diverse in the country.

You're mixing apples and oranges here. New Yorkers vote. We participate. Across class and race lines. The rules may be complex but they're fair and equal.

And you would not care if Bernie weren't losing. If he were winning you'd love NY.

As a 25 year New Yorker who votes every year I say this is butthurt sour grapes. We do not have massive voter suppression and haven't in many years.

NY State had about 29% in 2014. NYC only showed 20% turnout. 11% among Democrats in the city.

It's sad that you believe the opposite of that which is true about your election turnouts and participation rates. It explains how such low turnout can continue year after year.

Natural selection in a system of, by and for established politicians is going to produce rules that look mostly just like this.

They are very happy with that and will do nothing to change it.

... not any brighter than the Trump brood.

Sad.

And nothing matters more than being cool, right?

2 weeks or 1 month (not 'same day' or it is not a closed primary). 6 months before the voting is ridiculous.

Which at one time was a big issue, but isn't now - partially (or most likely) due to this law.

[img][/img]

It really is a disgrace. We would have same-day voting.

vote on selecting the candidate for that party. It makes sense, really. Why should it be easy for members of another party to change their party affiliation just before a primary election so they can attempt to decide who they'd prefer to run against?

Some states have closed primaries, and that's the main reason. Other states have other rules. In the general election, everyone who is registered to vote gets to vote to decide who the actual winner will be. In primaries, political parties are the ones having an election, so members of that party can select the person to run in the general election.

It's all been through the courts, right up to the SCOTUS, which has ruled that parties can restrict voting to their own party members to avoid malicious manipulation of the vote by members of an opposition party.

And there it is. I'm a Democrat. I want to vote in primary events to help decide who will run under the Democratic banner. I don't want people who are not actually Democrats to decide that. I don't want to vote in Republican primaries, either. I prefer to let them pick their own losing candidate.

New York's primary laws are what they are. But, regardless of your registered party affiliation, you'll be able to vote in the general election for any candidate on the ballot.

cycles. NY has election issues that are far more complicated just just their insanely early deadline to change Parties, NY State has some of the lowest voter turnout in the United States of America. NY City is even worse. Last election NYC Democrats turned out on average of 11% of eligible voters in area. 11%.

If NY likes having shamefully rotten turnout and votes who do not give a fuck that's their choice but I will roundly criticize that choice along with other democracy oriented people. You can celebrate lack of voter participation if you want.

Your own State is one of the best for voters. NY is one of the worst and the worst of the Blue States by far.

I have nothing whatever to do with their election laws and rules. Every state has rules. It's incumbent on people to know the rules in their own state, and it's not my responsibility to educate them about their own state's voting laws.

Responsible voters take responsibility for themselves.

Are New York rules outdated and strange? Perhaps they are. New Yorkers also elect their own state legislators, I believe. If they want a change, they can make a change.

election processes. NY is the least participatory Blue State, they have turnout that is consistently in the bottom 5 of the 50 States. Your State has consistently high turnout, and that is due to your superior election laws and the proactive nature of your election officials. My own State of Oregon has a closed Primary and more than double NY's pitiful turnout every damn cycle. It's not about Bernie. Not about Hillary. It was not about John Kerry. It's about NY voter apathy and overly restrictive laws that are in fact opposed by voter activists in the State of NY.

...

It seems awfully pointless, but the fact is our primary election laws are a mess all over. Caucuses discriminate against those who are not political activists, the poor, people with families, and others. Closed primaries, without the ability to change one's party affiliation up to the last minute, discriminate against good people who may support a particular candidate. Open primaries allow for shenanigans by the opposition. Voter ID laws enable states to discriminate against the poor. Funding for polling places allows states and localities to discriminate as they see fit.

The problems are vastly deeper than New York, but it's too late now to change anything. It all needs to be changed, and we knew it in 2000. But, no one has done anything about it, and right now the objections against the system are more about supporting one candidate or another, not about making the system better.

NY has some of the country's lowest voter participation rates, and that's not good for anyone. They are consistently in the bottom 5 for turnout among the 50 States. My State has a closed Primary and regularly has turnout more than double that of NY's. That's because NY has many problems that don't have anything to do with their having a closed Primary.
NY voter activists have been attempting to reform their restrictive election laws for years and years. NY is very apathetic to the process.

Crappy election laws are an offense to the people, always.

and will vote for either Hillary or Bernie. My guess is that purple states probably have the higher turnouts because one's vote is more important. I know a number of people in Massachusetts who supported Obama but did not vote simply because they were certain he would win this state.

Shouldn't each party limit its voting to members of the party? Isn't that the point of a primary (i.e. for Democrats and Republicans (and other parties) to choose who best to represent them)?

I don't understand why we would want Republicans voting in the Democratic primary.

so very obviously NY has issues that are not related to the closed nature of the Primary. More than twice the participation rates, closed primary.
NY consistently has some of the lowest turnout in the United States. Bottom five. No one should be content with that. It's shameful.

In 2014 the national turnout dropped and the country talked about that. More than 50% of the national turnout drop came from four large States with small turnout, NY, OH, CA and TX. That should not be a source of pride to any Democrat anywhere.

But I personally think a closed primary makes sense.