= new reply since forum marked as read
But I would shorten the deadline for party registration to at least 6 months before the primary date. Aside from that, PARTY activities should be restricted to those who actually identify as being members of the party.
Wow how nice of you to reduce the timeline to something that is greater than that of any other state. So you want voters to look in to the future and say, hey that person has a view I like, I will join this party! You do know the DNC is the smallest it has been, 29% in ages. You are in the minority, the majority of voters are not members of any of the two parties, if they all voted for an Independent party no Democrat or Republican could ever win (this is making a generalization that they are one solid voting block for effect). I am glad you are happy with the system, seems odd you want to destroy our party but it is your option. You should add a purity test to this too.
Long live the system!!!!
Nope. I want people who actually want to participate in the party for the PARTY'S sake, not because they are momentarily enthralled with a particular candidate. Save that for the General Election. If someone wants to shape the party, then they really should at the very least demonstrate their sincerity by actually being a member of the party. Mature and committed friends of the party should choose who leads it, not fickle voters who flit-in and flit-out based on their whims and emotions.
Cool gif!
Go, Hillary! We love you!
Nope. I want people who actually want to participate in the party for the PARTY'S sake, not because they are momentarily enthralled with a particular candidate. Save that for the General Election. If someone wants to shape the party, then they really should at the very least demonstrate their sincerity by actually being a member of the party. Mature and committed friends of the party should choose who leads it, not fickle voters who flit-in and flit-out based on their whims and emotions.
Soooo much to work with here, so very telling...
First line You only want people, good to know you are the deciding vote.
You say momentarily like an insult, but you are ignoring sooooooooooooo much, new voters, voters that moved, voters that changed their mind, voters that are becomming inspired. What you are describing is a inclusive boys club, not democracy...which could be common for HRC supporters since statically they belong to inclusive clubs like golf, yachting, dressage, etc far more.
So you know that people that participate in the primary are more involved with those that don't. The percentage of people voting in the DNC from the party is the lowest in the areas that Hillary is winning (as in record low). In other areas where people were allowed to join where close to the Obama election or far greater (specifically for the Democratic primary election). So you are 100% percent incorrect in trying to paint these people as the ones not involved.
You reliance on a Democrat purity test (should be a democrat) is very Carl Rovian...not that of a party called Democratic.
You line about Mature and committed friends of the party should choose who leads is a line could not note have dreamed on goating out of an HRC with out even trying! That is elitist, that is exactly the meaning! You are attacking the younger voters (45 and younger) and throwing in nepotism (one of the biggest problems with with government gobs, a system where the skilled are not hired, just the friends). You are aware that nepotism is not a good thing right? The fact that Hillary keeps and enemies list fits this narrative too.
And your last line is truly showing your privileged, lack of empathy, and disdain for the working class"not fickle voters who flit-in and flit-out based on their whims and emotions".
Verdict you get 4 "Marie Antoinette"s
Disclaimer: This is not endorsing the myth that Marie Antoinette said the line, but it to use the narrative that the attributed line embodies of an upper-class out of touch with the common folk.
See? Wasn't that simple?
1) Pick a party.
2) Join it.
3) Participate in it.
Can't decide on a party? Then declare yourself to be "Independent" and do nothing until the General Election. (Or, support your favorite candidate by donating or volunteering during the nomination process.)
Nobody is shut-out unless they CHOOSE to be shut-out. It's always THEIR CHOICE.
Play by the rules, or don't play. It's really not that hard.
Go, Hillary! We love you!
Yes that is, cut and dry, people that were dropped from the voter registry, or people that had not joined, or had just moved in, had to deal with sickness, depression, hardships, they can shut up and sit down, we only want people that know 6 months ahead of time, so basically heavily weighted to the biased, uniformed, close-minded, sheep, sycophants, insiders? Since while there are a large amount of amazing Democrats, it is statistically the people that have pre-judged who they are voting for who a closed door policy would benefit. The only good thing that some of the republican states have just done is to stop making the entire state fund the closed party elections, it was partially because it is such an easy sell to say hey look the parties are basically asking you to pay for their election rigging.
Sorry you just made it to 5, so here is your extra one...
... you really can't expect to flit around like a bumble bee going from flower to flower and expect the party to think you're truly interested unless you're willing to make the (easy) commitment of declaring a party on your voter registration.
You don't need to know the specific candidates who may be running in order to know if one party or the other is a closer match for your personal beliefs. If you're truly in the middle, if you're truly independent and if it's true that neither party comes close to your personal beliefs then you get to wait until the general election.
If you're afraid of commitment, or if you feel a sense of personal pride in being a free-thinking "independent", well, you'll just have to live with the consequences of that choice (depending on the rules of your state) and that's fine too. But don't complain to me about your choice.
That's how our system works. Mature voters know how to make decisions and make commitments without having to be enticed by any one pop-star candidate.
Ultimately, the choice is always yours. Choose or don't choose. It's up to you. Declare party affiliation early enough, and indicate your seriousness early enough and you get to participate in choosing the nominee.
But, if you're too late for this round, then there are other ways to help your favorite candidate. And... on the plus side, by becoming a party member NOW, those people will be able to easily participate in which candidate/s the party chooses in future primaries.
It's not my decision to make for you. You have to take responsibility for your own choices and not blame others and not be the "victim" of some conspiracy to disenfranchise you from the process.
Or... as a final option, you can just complain about it to anonymous strangers on internet political discussion forums, and do nothing. Whatever floats your boat.
Go, Hillary! We love you!
You like the idea that our party is the lowest in history? You like that such a small percentage of our party even votes, and you like that they choose the president? You are pro-oligarchy then? Your victim line is very telling, you are ok with people that are homeless or going through any number of hardships that prevents them from being able to register 6 months before an election...let alone show up to vote or mail in. Are you ok with the Caucuses? I have heard many HRC voters talk about his they are not democratic, mail in votes are so important. Just wondering where the hardship bar for you is acceptable? It seems to be oddly aligned with the personal gain of your candidate.
Wow for your pro-oligarchy stance earns you yet another cake point...
Keep me posted on your progress. Good luck!
Go, Hillary! We love you!
Just like you care about the youth and lower class walking on to your lawn. There is no excuse for your view other than greed and power. A 6 month wait means young voters will be blocked, people new to the area, people in hardships, people coming back to the system. What if we promised they would vote the way you wanted, would that make it ok?
... work with what you've got and try to make it better.
Or, you can declare that you're "independent" and do nothing except complain online about how you WISH it was different and how "unfair" it is that you can't have your way.
On the bright side, if you honestly believe that griping online is the way to go, then you can take great comfort in the knowledge that with each and every new message you post here, you're just *that much* closer to achieving your goal (of whatever it may be.) 
Goodbye.
Go, Hillary! We love you!
That is why I have called and emailed or candidates, and why I have been in this party for years. That is why I will be at the delegate convention here on the weekend. I find the fact that so many HRC supporters love the idea that we are in closed primaries horrible. They are laughing from the other side of the window, but when the house collapses in on them they better hope those on the outside are their to help them. Perhaps your vote will also get rejected and you will suddenly see how unfair it is. Don't worry when that happens we will have your backs because that is what our party was supposed to be about.
Go Green. Or something.
So she gets the primary and we get Trump in the GE. Sad but it is what it is. People don't trust her, people don't like her. 
Bump-bump-ba-dum... Whaaaa!
