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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Historic NY

(37,449 posts)
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:09 AM Apr 2016

Even the Green Party disagrees with open primary....

"Open" primaries only serve the short-term interests of unaffiliated voters at the expense of party members who spend time and energy building a fighting organization with a coherent platform and agenda. Should someone who is not a member of a union be allowed to vote for who will be the president of that union? Of course not: a fundamental element of the right to freely assemble is the ability to set reasonable criteria to establish who is a member and who is not.

http://www.gp.org/statement_from_the_green_party_of_ny_on_open_primaries_lawsuit_and_need_for_democratic_reform

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

DetroitSocialist83

(169 posts)
1. I like the idea of fusion voting
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:13 AM
Apr 2016

As the Working Families Party uses. I think that should be allowed in primaries as well as general elections, but that's just me.

Historic NY

(37,449 posts)
16. Except it won't work for a primary....
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 07:39 PM
Apr 2016

major parties will reject the dilution. You have the right to vote for your a party member, the person to lead the party. That is the main reason for the primary in the first place.

auntpurl

(4,311 posts)
2. Well, quite.
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:14 AM
Apr 2016

All these calls of voter disenfranchisement over closed primaries which have been around for many many years...it's just ridiculous. And I am someone who HATES voter disenfranchisement and has been active against it for a long time.

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
3. Denying a citizen's right to vote should frighten you,
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:16 AM
Apr 2016

unless you are one of those who believe in small “d” democracy, the idea that a citizen’s right to vote is only conditioned on joining a private political party.

And, if you believe in small “r” republican governance, the idea that legislators represent political parties and not their entire constituency should worry you—especially when almost 50 percent of voters no longer trust either political party to represent them.

Seeing how independents will have a say in the general election,
and will be voting for the nominee that the party nominates, it makes sense that they should have a say in who that nominee that they are voting for is. A closed primary is limiting political freedom, period!

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
7. Waking up on election day & realizing you can't vote b/c you didn't bother to register
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:34 AM
Apr 2016

Isn't denying your right to vote. It means you're being lazy & irresponsible.

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
8. You do realize over 50% of voters no longer trust either political party to represent them?
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:44 AM
Apr 2016

Bernie tapped into that voting block. They should of had the right to vote for their candidate, period!

auntpurl

(4,311 posts)
9. You don't have to trust a political party to register with them
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:48 AM
Apr 2016

You don't have to donate to them, work for their candidates, or even privately identify as a member of the party. But if you are liberal/left-leaning and you live in a closed primary state, you are only hurting yourself if you don't register with the Democratic Party. What's the likelihood you're going to vote for a Republican? Registering just gives you options, access. You can choose not to vote!

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
10. Then an inspiriring Green candidate comes along and
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:52 AM
Apr 2016

they are registered as a democrat, it's not right.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
17. But somehow it IS right that the will of party members is overridden?
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 08:35 PM
Apr 2016

How on earth is THAT right?

"Hey it's your club and all, but WE get to decide who you leader is."

No, Thanks.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
11. Trump taps into that voting block too.
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:56 AM
Apr 2016

And the only reason it exists is because the Republicans have been working to create it for 40 yrs.

Just because some idiots can't be bothered to take their responsibility as citizens seriously enough to register to vote doesn't mean their right to vote has been taken away.

Historic NY

(37,449 posts)
15. Sure the would it won't change because none of the parties want it...
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 07:33 PM
Apr 2016

they need to maintain a certain number of voters in order to get on the ballot.

DrDan

(20,411 posts)
6. of course they do - anyone with less votes than Hillary will complain about rigged primaries and/or
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:34 AM
Apr 2016

some other faux-conspiracy. Otherwise, they would have to admit they are getting beat because the voters prefer someone else.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Even the Green Party disa...