Meet The People Barred From Voting In New York’s Presidential Primary

[dana_b]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/14/3769498/independent-voters-open-primaries-new-york/

Meet The People Barred From Voting In New York’s Presidential Primary
BY EMILY ATKIN APR 14, 2016 3:21 PM

MANHATTAN, NEW YORK — Here’s a little-known fact about New York’s fast-approaching presidential primary election: More than 3 million people — about 27 percent of the state’s voters — can’t participate in it.
That’s because they’re not registered with either the Democratic or Republican party. Some are registered independents, others are registered with smaller parties, like Green or Working Families.

Either way, these people can’t participate because of New York’s strict closed primary rules, which state that only registered Democrats can vote for Democratic presidential candidates, and only registered Republicans can vote for Republicans. In addition, New York has the earliest change-of-party deadline in the country. If registered independents wanted to change parties to vote in the primary, they had to do so before October 9, 2015 — more than six months ago.
On Thursday, approximately 150 New Yorkers rallied in front of New York City Hall to demand open primaries. Right now, at least 16 states have completely open primaries, where anyone is allowed to vote in the presidential nominating contest, regardless of party affiliation. Ten states have semi-open primaries, where party-affiliated voters are restricted to their party’s primary but independent voters can choose which nominating contest they’d like to vote in.

More at link

Lots of personal stories at the link. I hope that NY changes this process soon and that the Democratic party SUPPORTS it.
And no, I don't think it will happen before Tuesday!

[hrmjustin]

1. They chose not to register as a Democrat in this state so that is their problem.

You want to vote in our primary register as a Democrat in NY.

They were warned.

[DesertFlower]

6. same here in arizona. i'm on a

permanent registration. i still went on-line a month before to make sure everything was okay. can't be too careful.

[B Calm]

23. So the kid who just turned 18 is just shit out of luck. This is so wrong!

[upaloopa]

27. You vote in the election that happens after you turn 18. Of couse you have to register for a party

in this case Dem. We all did that and we followed the rules.

[B Calm]

29. NY rules seem odd to me. You'd think you would be welcoming new democrats into

the party.

[DrDan]

88. not odd at all - register as a Dem - vote in the Dem primary

really quite simple, and quite appropriate

[bettyellen]

70. New voter deadline was just recently- the six months is to change parties...

Also, it would take the cooperation of Staterepublicans to change the rules. Not sure if that is going to happen.

[Baobab]

67. I wouldnt be surprised if a lot of them are ex-democrats or ex-republicans

who are disillusioned with the two parties currently.

[LiberalFighter]

86. There aren't that many

Not when nearly 50% of the registered voters in New York are registered Democratic.

[Bjorn Against]

91. And by shutting them out of the primary you are less likely to get their vote in the general

If you want Democrats to lose in the General Election then make sure that independents have no voice in the primaries.

There is no reason for independents to vote for a party that shuts out their voice, those who want closed primaries are harming the chances of Democrats winning the General.

[hrmjustin]

93. Both parties shut them out.

So...

[Bjorn Against]

94. So they are more likely to stay home

[hrmjustin]

95. I think not. These rules have been in effect for decades.

We always get more voters in the general than primaries.

There goes your argument.

[Bjorn Against]

96. And people are more upset about the rules this year than ever before

Just because the rules have been in place for a long time does not mean they are good rules, nor does it mean they can't get more unpopular over time.

My state has had caucuses for years with little complaint but this year people complained loudly and my state is considering eliminating caucuses now.

Just because a bad law has been in effect for a long time without much complaint does not mean you can ignore it when people do start to complain.

People are fed up with the system and they want change.

[hrmjustin]

97. They were just as pissed in 2008 and they still voted.

[Bjorn Against]

98. Well if you keep pissing them off don't expect them to keep voting Democratic

There are third party options, don't be surprised when the Green Party gets far more votes this year than they did last time.

[riversedge]

2. They barred themselves!

[artyteacher]

52. yup eom

[TMontoya]

3. Boo hoo for them

They aren't Democrats, then they don't deserve to vote for the Democratic nominee.

[B Calm]

31. Barring them almost certainly reassures they'll never become democrats.

[Skink]

76. Nothing like a free sample to drum up business

[noretreatnosurrender]

4. I Remember When the Democratic Party

wasn't afraid of Independent voters and actually went out of their way to earn their votes. My how far we've fallen. We look more like Republicans who have always tried to limit the number of voters in an election.

[msongs]

5. in case you missed the memo these people COULD have registered and chose not to nt

[noretreatnosurrender]

8. I Didn't Miss A Thing

My comment was about my Party. I've been a Democrat since the early 70s and back then we always went after the Independent vote. We damn sure didn't attack them. Just look at this thread - we have Hillary supporters who are hellbent on alienating all of the Independent voters. It's beyond comprehension. Our Party is in big trouble with attitudes like this. Our Party used to brag about having a big tent. Not now. We've become a gated community that tries to keep out voters that have a different opinion. We're turning into Republicans and it's very painful to watch.

[upaloopa]

28. This is a primary not the general election. We will still go after the independents in the general.

[noretreatnosurrender]

34. Too Late

We blew it big time.

[TrueDemVA]

30. Our Party has left us

Independents should be welcomed to our party. Heck, anyone that feels left out from their party or who is inspired by one candidate and wants to cast a vote should be welcomed.

This is one of the results of not giving any airtime to Bernie all of 2015, people weren't given a chance to learn about this other guy, b/c they were told from day one, he is nobody, don't mind him. I am sick of our party acting like the Republican party. All of those Hillary supporters who say it is the people's fault for not changing or registering in time are focusing in on the wrong thng. This is voter suppression.

People should be allowed to change their minds anytime they want and not have their RIGHT to vote taken away. This party is no longer the party of the people. It seems to filling up with more and more assholes who blame the people instead of seeing it is the establishment that is restricting our rights. The right that people gave their lives for. That is what is being missed by these DINOs.

[LiberalFighter]

87. They don't lose their right to vote.

Just like a person needs to be registered before they are allowed to vote they need to declare their party affiliation if they want to vote in a primary.

[TrueDemVA]

99. I agree about registering, but

What about the people who have been registered as democrats, but for some reason their status has changed. This isn't some random problem. It is happening in other states as well. It's happening to to dem and repubs. People are being fucked over and it is a serious problem.

[DrDan]

12. remember when one erred, they admitted it rather than become the victim?

[noretreatnosurrender]

35. I hope you remember

that come November when Independents stay home in droves if Hillary is the nominee.

[DrDan]

36. because they were victimized by not registering per the rules?

The rules were not kept secret. They have not changed. They are simple and easy to understand. They require little effort.

Yet those who cannot vote blame the system rather than themselves.

[noretreatnosurrender]

37. My Comments Are About

the Democratic Party and their alienation of Independents. I've never talked once about registering in NY. Pay attention.

[DrDan]

49. but my post, the one you responded to, and the OP both were in regard to registering in NY

are you just posting nebulous posts randomly? or just not paying attention?

[B Calm]

39. Tell that to the 18 yr old who was inspired by a candidate and just registered to vote

for the first time.

[DrDan]

48. then they probably registered as a Democrat, right? no problem

[B Calm]

75. No, you have to be registered months ahead.

[sweetloukillbot]

77. New registrations had to be done by March 18 (I think)

Changing party affiliation had to be done in October.

[B Calm]

78. Link?

[sweetloukillbot]

83. I was wrong - it was March 25.

http://www.elections.ny.gov/VotingDeadlines.html

[DrDan]

82. postmarked on the 25th

http://www.elections.ny.gov/VotingDeadlines.html

[DrDan]

79. wasn't kept a secret, right?

[Zira]

25. +1

[B Calm]

7. Limiting Political Freedom is not a liberal idea, it's RW Authoritian.

Hell even behind the Hoosier Iron Curtain (regardless of which political party you are aligned with), you can ask for either ballot in the primary election. That's the way it should be nationwide.

[JudyM]

14. Forget it, they are lost in the winning, principles be damned. Remind you of anyone?

[Stallion]

9. Oh No! Democrats Are Going to Decide the Democratic Nominee

getting the hammer out

[CentralCoaster]

10. Why does this BULLSHIT only ever come to light when it's too late to fix???

.
And then after elections it is forgotten?

What the hell, isn't there an ACLU or some group working on this year round?

[bettyellen]

15. the ACLU is helping people who actually ARE disenfranchised, not those who forget to register.

why didn't you find out the rules and do something earlier?

[CentralCoaster]

17. Back off, please. I don't have a registration problem, I'm speaking on behalf of others.

And I'm speaking broadly, of voter registration and polling place problems of all sorts, in all states, including irregular hours and letting asshole bozo candidate's spouses fuck around outside and inside polling places on election day.

I'm speaking for victims of all manner of voter disenfranchisement and ratfucking, going on in many places, not just those who were caught off guard not knowing that they had to file a registration for an April election the prior October.

Which, actually, is pretty fucked up but not as egregious as some of the other bullshit.

[bettyellen]

21. the ACLUS prioritizes those who actually can't vote despite following the rules....

and I would say that should be the priority. I'd love it if it was easier, but legal voters get purged at alarming rates by the GOP to suppress minority voting by the thousands and thousands. That should be their priority.

[Art_from_Ark]

18. Many New York DUers tried to bring this up last September/October

But the party apparatchiks had decided that they wanted to close party re-registration 6 full months before the actual primary, and even before the first debate between Sanders and Clinton.

[CentralCoaster]

20. Favoritism and voter ratfucking in plain sight!

What a shame.

[bettyellen]

22. If you were not thinking of voting Republican- why is that a problem seeing Dems debate each other

would help with? Seriously?

[questionseverything]

54. the start of the debates generally wake up the electorate....to election time

the dnc really blew it by giving the repubs a 2 month head start on debates, which translate into free airtime

it is not surprising that the big money state of ny also has the most restrictive rules for party participation

i am not a fan of closed primaries but the idea of having to change registrations 6 months before the election is obviously in place to keep voters out or disenfranchise them

<shrugs>

[bettyellen]

55. I never gave open primaries a thought (never had them) and the first I heard of them was

people intending to vote in the other primary to screw the other party. I think that hurt our process in ways impossible to quantify.
I think three months would be sufficient, but really do not want to encourage republicans to vote for spoilers either or vice versa.

[questionseverything]

59. if the requirement was 3 months before the election at least more people would realize

it is election time...so the disenfranchisement would not be as large

the debates would of been on going and as i said it reminds the average joe it is time to pay attention

your worry about repubs influencing democratic primaries seems so silly to me...in my state illinois we have an open primary and FINALLY same day registration....i am old and i have never known anyone to waste their vote by taking the other parties ballot

here in illinois we are still encouraging a big tent while ny seems to be about making sure the moneyed insiders control the process by limiting party participation

all the 99 are democrats, wether they know it or not so i want to welcome them when ever they come to terms

[bettyellen]

61. I wish we had uniform standards. It seems the GOP has been screwing with the

Process in so many different ways it is hard to keep tabs on. I think same day registration would be awesome, also voting by mail- whatever makes it easier. Right now things are nad

[questionseverything]

63. ny is controlled by democrats, right? so i don't think we can blame this on repubs this time

i am just shocked ny dems seem to want to limit imput ,like repubs do

thanks for the civil discussion

[bettyellen]

68. Party stuff is decided by the party.... And the problem is Dems and the GOP won't ever coordinate...

But the GOP is behind a lot of legislation to raise requirements for ID and also for pushing to purge voter rolls in a lot of states. They push for challenges when they see similar (ethnic( names on the rolls to get rid of registered voters of color- or in Dem areas. So don't underestimate the damage they have done.

[LiberalFighter]

89. If they were bringing it up back in Sept/Oct

then why didn't they change their party affiliation at that time?

[Trajan]

101. You do realize ...

That at least a percentage of those who DID register since Nov 2015 found their status altered to unaffiliated as well ... right ?

[Earth_First]

11. So Democats are choosing which Democrat represents them?

...and not a meddling front of party outsiders affecting the potential outcome of the process?

I'm more concerned with individuals who are charged with non-violent felony offenses barred from voting period than I am of some GOP scoundrel ratfucking with our primary.

Want to support the Democratic candidate?

Register as Democrat and embrace the party platform!

[TCJ70]

13. It doesn't help that the cutoff date to switch in NY was back in OCTOBER!

That's a tragedy. Before any debates, before any exposure. Now you're locked out if you feel strongly about a candidate. This is not a good thing.

[bettyellen]

16. honeslty- if someone didn't know last year whether they wanted to republican or dem president....

I don't want them deciding our candidate. Fuck that.

[Surya Gayatri]

41. "If someone didn't know last year whether they wanted a Republican or Dem president....",

they shouldn't be allowed to screw around with the process in the Party's Presidential Choice Primary today.

Sounds like a bunch of Trumpnuts wanting to "rat-f__k" the Dem Party.

Thank goodness NY takes party affiliation seriously.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

42. Question

Were people asked to register to vote for Hillary or Bernie back in October? If an Indy was planning on voting Democrat, why was figuring that out six months ago too hard?

[TCJ70]

46. I don't know how soon anyone was approached...

...I just don't understand why changing party affiliation has a deadline. It shouldn't. It's not that anything is hard, it's just being made remarkable inconvenient, which shouldn't be the case with voting.

[Lancero]

19. Sad to see so many supporting voter disinfranchisement.

Their reasons for supporting disenfranchisement are just like the Republicans really - This group isn't likely to vote for their candidate, so in their minds they shouldn't be allowed to vote at all.

[Hoyt]

26. Register as an Independent and you'll have to wait until general election. Not hard to understand.

[Lancero]

50. Get a valid id. Not hard to understand.

[firebrand80]

24. I don't necessarily disagree with closed primaries

But it should be easier to change your registration.

[factfinder_77]

32. The voting rules have been clear and known to both BS himself, his campaign and supporters for years

The only reason BS is running is a democrat, is that he knows he won’t get the votes he need or media attention if he runs as a 3 candidate.

The voting rules have been clear and known to both BS himself, his campaign and supporters for years.

So please, stop complaining about the system.

[B Calm]

33. Glad you find Limiting Political Freedom as democratic, I don't!

[Dem2]

43. Strawman

[amborin]

62. Dems were darn glad when he always caucused with them

[Skink]

84. So the only choice is Republican or Republican light

[brooklynite]

38. Simple solution; register as a Democrat

Don't show your "independence" and then want to decide things for everyone who actually joined the Party.

[Freddie Stubbs]

40. Holding big rallies can be fun, but registering Democrats to vote is more effective

Better luck next time.

[baldguy]

44. There's nothing nefarious or undemocratic about a closed primary.

To insinuate that it is, is dishonest, disingenuous & hypocritical.

Par for the course for Sanders supporters.

[msanthrope]

45. Have we reached the bargaining phase? nt

[kiva]

47. So many posters who oppose caucuses

because they are exclusionary are suddenly popping up here to defend this exclusionary policy...makes my head spin.

For the record, I've been a registered Dem for 40 years I oppose caucuses and I oppose this sort of manipulation by the party to control elections.

[Avalon Sparks]

51. Shame to see voter suppression lauded by a Democrat

Voter suppression is a Repub tactic.

[2banon]

53. Question: Does New York send out reminders to voters (via mail)

making it clear of the rules, and how their registration status may be impacted?

Californians who were not registered with any specific party just received notices in the mail. These mailers are reminders of their registration status as a "non-partisan" and how that will be prevented from being able to vote in the primaries per partisan party rules, (D, R,I. t), and offering the option to change party preference by checking the box next to party of choice and returning by mail, postage paid.

6 weeks in advance of the June primaries.

Does New York provide this information with option to registered voters? If not, I'd suggest a law suit against the State of New York for voter disenfranchisement.

These parties may be private clubs, but citizens have a birthright to participate in elections without having to be members of their private clubs.

And if they want to attempt to keep up the pretense of "democracy" so that we can have it as tool to laud over China, Russia, Saudi Arabia etc. they'd better at least get a lot more real with this dog and pony show.

[questionseverything]

56. the rules in ny give advantage to the never registered voter over the long time registered voter

the never registered voter had until march 25 or 26 to register and declare a party

the long time voter had to declare a party back on oct 9th of 2015

i wonder if their isn't grounds for a lawsuit there

[2banon]

73. Thit is sooo weird.

Gotta say, I've been voting since 1972 . Most of the time registered as a Democrat. Sometimes, I registered Peace and Freedom on and off for a few years. Registered Green in a Mid term, but switched back to Dem. Always switching back to Dem.

All this to say, that never until THIS campaign has it ever been admitted out loud and on no uncertain terms, the Republican and Democratic parties are private organizations. The party elites decides on the rules.

Tonight's PBS Snooze Hour, David Brooks reminded audiences that these are private organizations ruled by Party Bosses for a reason, why votes made by ordinary citizens can be over ruled by appointed delegates chosen by the party bosses or by the candidates, the purpose is so that the status quo remains in tact.

When Bernie says we need a Political Revolution, he's not just talking about over turning Citizens United, as important as that is.

Count me in for the long haul.

[oasis]

57. Sign up or shove off. nt

[Tarc]

58. Imagine that; having to be registered with a political party to choose that party's candidate

[bigtree]

60. what part of 'Democratic' primary don't they understand?

...how weak to complain about the rules when you're behind and poised to lose.

Welcome to the Democratic party!

[msanthrope]

64. Democrats voting for Democrats. Nt

[Joob]

65. Not very Democratic, we'll see how that works out for them

[SidDithers]

66. So, non-Democrats...nt

Sid

[Adrahil]

69. People who aren;t members of the parties can't vote in party primaries?

I'm shocked... SHOCKED I tell you.

Democrats should selected the Democratic nominee.

[dana_b]

71. thankfully many states do not think as you do

and want voters to participate no matter WHICH party they ascribe to.

It's too bad that New York doesn't realize that the biggest "party" are independents, many who were once Dems but who left because the party has drifted so far to the right.

Luckily for me and millions of other indys, California is a bit more progressive.

[Adrahil]

72. So, party's shouldn;t be able to select their own nominee?

Well thank Jeebus for Superdelegates then.

I don't see anything "progressive" about letting non-party members fuck over the party nomination process.

[riversedge]

74. I am glad NY is closed.

[Skink]

85. Texas is utopia

Early voting at any location. Which ballot do you want they always ask.

[Onlooker]

80. So, now this is an issue?

What utter incompetence for the Sanders campaign to make this an issue the day before the election.

[brooklynite]

81. Wow - Look at That!

Five Parties to choose from...or an explicit choice not to.

[MichMan]

90. I am in favor of closed primaries

I am in favor of closed primaries. Too much opportunity for malicious crossover voting by either side. This is especially a problem when an incumbent is running like Obama in 2012 or Bush in 2004.

For those who think it never happens, I beg to differ. My state, Michigan, has a governor that has been characterized as one of the worst in the country. We have open primaries. In the 2010 election, Gov. Jennifer Granholm was term limited and with the state reeling in economic recession due to the auto industry, it was fairly obvious based on polling that a Repug was going to win. Her Lt Governor, John Cherry and other prominent Democrats all refused to run leaving it to "America's Angriest Mayor" Lansing Mayor Virg Benero and a somewhat obscure Mich House Speaker, Andy Dillon.

The Republican race had several candidates including a few prominent politicians and an unknown businessman Rick Snyder. With rather widespread crossover voting with 66% of the voters voting in the Repug primary, Rick Snyder was a surprise winner. It appeared that Democratic crossover voters wanted to play spoiler by making sure the better known politicians were defeated by someone with no political history.

Well the problem was that Snyder won easily over Benero by 20 pts, as expected and the "non political" businessman enacted right to work, instituted a pension tax on previously tax free public pensions, signed a controversial Emergency manager law and others. To this day, I blame the Democratic crossover voters for ensuring he won the primary

[seabeyond]

92. Bummer. They should have thought it thru and become informed. Rules. Those silly rules, I tell you

[vintx]

100. What if they all just wrote in Bernie's name in the GE.

That'd be a hoot.

[dana_b]

102. Well now what do you think they'll do? n/t