If Bernie/Hillary folks can't find common ground on *Electoral Reform* then we're in big trouble

[HerbChestnut]

This one should be a no-brainer, and yet there seems to be some real differences of opinion here. Automatic voter registration when turning 18 and Open Primaries is as simple as it gets. If we can't all support that then I don't even know where to start on healthcare, education, foreign policy, etc.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

1. Automatic voter registration is very different from open primaries

People can agree on some things and disagree on others.

You seem to think that one has to agree with all your ideas for unity. I'm not sure why that is. Obviously we disagreed on some things which is why we picked different candidates

[swhisper1]

3. some fight unity

[La Lioness Priyanka]

4. Some believe that only their ideas have value

[swhisper1]

9. glad you agree with me

[La Lioness Priyanka]

38. I will never go against the wishes of the congressional black caucus on voting rights EVER

They represent those who have truly faced voter disenfranchisement and not this new hipster 'I'm too cool to register with the dem, but I'm disenfranchised if I'm not allowed to vote in their party'. No democrat should go against the wishes of the Cbc on voting rights.

[avaistheone1]

52. I recognize what you are saying about the CBC, disenfranchisement and voting rights.

However, there are no sacred cows or sacred people. CBC are political people and political people sometimes do things for their own reasons and as such they are capable of using their power and influence inappropriately. I think a good example is the CBC endorsement of super delegates, which I strongly believe undermines our democracy. Therefore I am diametrically opposed to the CBC on this issue. I don't resign my thinking to the CBC or to any individual or group.

[bettyellen]

55. But the CBC has smarter priorities- getting rid of onerous voter ID laws and

I think caucuses are a much bigger problem than the super delegates. And disagree about open primaries, am not for them.

[Maru Kitteh]

74. You just called the Congressional Black Caucus "SACRED COWS" on Democratic Underground.

What the blueberry f*k has happened here?

[avaistheone1]

83. Actually I didn't. Read my post again.

I said there are no sacred cows.

[Maru Kitteh]

85. Your meaning was conveyed perfectly. nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

124. The cbc commenting on voting rights is far more scared to me

Than people who lost the primary advocating for something that hurts black voters.

[Sheepshank]

57. if La Lioness agreed with you on everything, then you'd both be wrong

[NurseJackie]

58. There are many who believe in "all or nothing" and would (apparently) rather have nothing ...

... instead of finding common ground. I never really understood it myself. Aside from one's personal pride and satisfaction is being able to say "I-stood-firm" ... is that really a good alternative to making some progress instead of NO progress?

I guess some folks have different priorities that are more related to vanity and denying their adversaries any compromise ... they see anything short of total victory as being a "defeat" of some sort.



PS: I like automatic registration as well. Everyone should be automatically registered to vote in the General Election. THAT'S what I call making it easy! But when it comes to choosing a PARTY NOMINEE, the voter should at least be a MEMBER of the party! (And if you think about it, it's not that hard to do.)

[floriduck]

76. But both candidates agreed on a $15 minimum wage and it was voted down. How does that

happen? I'm confused.

[NorthCarolina]

136. What candidate other than Bernie has endorsed a $15 minimum wage?

Clinton is loosely for $12 in some areas last I heard, after being pushed to that in response to Bernie's call for $15.

[floriduck]

137. I hear ya but Hillary did state in one of the later debates she, too, was for $15. She is or she

isn't. The platform resistance says she was just saying that but didn't mean it.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

116. Open primaries suck! Why should a Republican or Indy be able to vote for the Dem candidate?

Especially a Republican. I know people who like to screw with the opposing party in the primaries. And if you're an independent, stop dicking around and register as a Democrat.

[still_one]

126. Why would I want open primaries, so those who aren't Democrats can decide who the Democratic nominee

is?

No thank you

[tymorial]

127. Not in the land of identity politics

Where univeral agreement does not permit nuance and questioning any portion of the collective thought elicits a response reminiscent of the borg.

I would insert sarcasm but I am not being sarcastic.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

131. what does 'identity politics' have to do with this?

[swhisper1]

2. automatic registration is an answer to getting people to vote without disenfranchisement

[Hortensis]

25. Both candidates want that.

Just being registered won't get many more people to vote, though. After all, registration has been traditionally extremely easy in most places, for most but not all groups, and look at our people's deplorable history. Those who feel it is their responsibility and care enough to put it on their to-do lists vote.

[uponit7771]

5. Fuck open primaries, that's as easy as it gets... I've seen little need to reform what has worked in

... the past outside of the non democratic caucus process.

It's already been explained ad nausea that open primaries allow too much outside influence and little to no practical retort to the claim

[SaschaHM]

8. I'll say it again for you. Fuck open primaries.

You want to shape the agenda, choose the nominee, and lead the party? Join the damn party then. I didn't get to choose the Green, Libertarian, or Republican candidates, I don't expect them to choose the Democratic one.

[Hortensis]

27. Open primaries make perfect sense to those

who believe it is vitally important to replace "establishment" Democratic voters with those who are currently too honorable and disgusted to join such a morally bankrupt party. Of course, some of us are not so confident that would be an improvement, and so we respectfully disagree.

[uponit7771]

30. Many poor, PoC, gay, religious minorities are "establishment" democrats, tbh everytime I see that

... I think too many "others".

To many people whining about the "others" sharing power so it time to reduce their power by having open primaries and reducing the role of the SDs

[Hortensis]

36. It's important for those who respect democracy

to remember that behind the labels are actually many millions of people with their own beliefs and rights. Forgetting that is inimical to democracy.

[uponit7771]

37. true

[Maru Kitteh]

72. Get out of my head, lol. Yeah, FUCK OPEN PRIMARIES X1,000,000,000,000 to the 10th

Everyone is invited to the party, but if you can't be bothered to RSVP, don't act all shocked and put out when the menu items are chosen for you.

[still_one]

128. You want election reform, change the caucus's to primaries. I don't want someone who isn't a

Democrat, having a say in telling who the Democratic nominee should be

[uponit7771]

130. +1

[The Second Stone]

6. I disagree on open primaries. I don't want trouble makers voting for the worst

candidate. I want party members choosing the party candidate. Not non-party members and the opposition.

So if that is a demand from the non-party members, yeah, unity is going to be trouble.

[LongtimeAZDem]

7. Open primaries are uneccesary and unwise

There is no reason to allow anyone to vote in a primary if they are not part of the party; opening them just invites deliberate meddling by party opponents, as we saw in West Virginia.

[Lyric]

24. As a resident of West Virginia who witnessed this behavior first-hand at the polls

I totally agree. I couldn't say a word about it at the time, but the Trumpeteers leaving our polling place laughing about voting for Sanders was infuriating. I truly believe that the Trump campaign deliberately orchestrated that whole fiasco. I know for a FACT that Trump's campaign tried to hire people to sit at polling places in Trump gear and talk to voters about something, because one of Rhythm's co-workers has a son who supports Trump and he attempted to do precisely that. Of course he got thrown off the property because apparently Trump supporters are too stupid to understand election laws. But when it comes to sabotage and deceit, they're awfully good at THAT.

I saw that not only are open primaries terrible, but last minute voter registration is terrible. Voters in primaries should have to be registered at LEAST 3 months before the election, with the SOLE exception being for people who have physically moved during that time frame and need to register at their new address. 90 days. WV doesn't have an open primary, but we DO have the ability to change your registration 30 days before a primary. Get rid of that crap. I'm tired of Repukes and crazy white supremacists screwing with our primaries. Our school board and judicial elections are a nightmare because of this crap, even if you ignore what happened at the national level.

[AgadorSparticus]

132. +1,000

[LaydeeBug]

45. ^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^

I will fight tooth and nail against open primaries. You want to be a part of our process? Be a part of our party.

[Maru Kitteh]

75. +1

[DemonGoddess]

97. +1000!

[onecaliberal]

77. In a DEMOCRACY you make it easy for everyone to vote.

Newsflash: There are more Indies than republicans or democrats. They are going to vote in the general, disenfranchising them during the primary is a fools errand. Give people something to for FOR. Stop screwing people, stop supporting corporations to the detriment of the country.

[DemonGoddess]

98. The purpose of the primaries

is to select a PARTY's nominee. Not the Independent/Green/Libertarian/Socialist/etc nominee. Those groups have their own selections, NOT open to Democrats. Why the hell should we open ours? You want to select the nominee of a party, join the damn party. Easy.

[merrily]

106. Primaries are held at state expense. That makes them the business of all voters in the state.

If they are held at state expense all voters in the state should have something to say about the rules for voting in a primary.

If the parties want to make their own rules for primaries and be that exclusionary, then the parties need to pay for the primaries.

[DemonGoddess]

108. yes, primaries are held at state expense

for EACH PARTY. They're for the selection of the PARTY nominee. They are not general elections. Thing is, they're usually also bundled with the LOCAL primaries. Some states hold separate ones for local, but most of them do it all at once.

[merrily]

110. Sorry, no. State expense makes primaries the business of all voters in the state.

They should decide the rules for primary voting. Any party that want to decide the rules for its own party is free to pay for its own primary.

[DemonGoddess]

112. It really doesn't

In that case, it becomes a general election, not a selection of a party nominee, for whatever office. Or would you rather we went back to the old days where no one had any voice at all in selecting the nominee? I wouldn't.

[merrily]

113. Sorry, your position makes no sense to me. It's about who pays, not whether it's a primary or a

Last edited Fri Jun 24, 2016, 11:28 PM - Edit history (1)

general. Anything that the state does at public expense should not be dictated by any party. In my state over half the registered voters are "unenrolled" in any party.

[AgadorSparticus]

133. I disagree. It is not just about who pays. It is about election integrity.

And you can't have integrity when you have Republicans voting for a democratic nominee and vice versa. Making people pick a party is not the same as telling them they can't vote.

[merrily]

135. Then have each party pay for its own exclusionary primary and its own party integrity.

Making each party get exactly what it wants is not the financial responsibility of state taxpayers. That's where I started this discussion. See Reply 106.

Parties want to have it both ways, with taxpayers bearing the expense, parties calling the shots and judges saying internal party business is private stuff, not reviewable by a court. Well. fsck that. Pay for them and call all the shots, or have taxpayers pay for more democratic primaries, one or the other.

[gordianot]

10. Herding cats = Herding Democratic Party

Some have tried with varying success. Just look at DU a similar struggle on smaller scale. There is no way I could ever be a Republican conformist so I am stuck with being a Democrat.

The Democratic Party has always been very diverse in opinion, and will always be subject to chaotic rules.

[Hortensis]

28. Not so bad these days, really. Remember, those sayings

came from the days when some of the strongest conservatives in the nation, the Southern Conservative faction, were Democrats because they despised Republicans from the north even more than the larger liberal democratic faction. We were constantly having to join with moderate Republicans to outvote the knuckledraggers in our own party.

Of course, we now face a mostly united conservative front, with a fairly authoritarian top-down hierarchy and the far right dominating, a grim and dangerous reality, but at least those first-class troublemakers are no longer Democrats.

Today's Democratic Party is a collection of "identity politics" factions who are most at least leaning left, though some conservatives are still Democrats. One thing Bernie has done for us is remind us that we need to focus our energies on our collective liberal goals more and less on our various identities. Yes, we're great as far as it goes because we're the diverse American party that unites most groups, but!

[gordianot]

47. We live in a post cold war world where everything is confused a major nexus in time.

American Conservatives live without communist international threat they actually embrace a former Communist Russian and current dictator, Capitalist oligarchs have picked up the Communist international consolidation with secret negotiation trade deals, an American Socialist Democrat runs for high office as basically an American Nationalist opposing international economic consolidation, a Democratic career bureaucrat almost instantly embraces the positions of her former rival and may actually join with another Democratic icon whose main cause opposes Wall Street the source of the Democratic bureaucrat's political power, a political party reviled by its constituents for being spineless takes over floor of the people's house in an act of open and probably illegal rebellion, one of the most conservative political parties on Earth selects as it's Presidential candidate a radical con man with no real political experience and a serious narcissistic personality disorder.

SO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY CANNOT FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO A PRIMARY OR REFORM ...

.GO FIGURE

[kcjohn1]

11. How can you be for automatic registration but against open primaries?

The whole point of automatic registration is to stop barrier to voting. Having to register for party prior hand before election is burdensome barrier.

I think all primaries should be semi-open. If you are registered as independent you should be able vote for either parties. If closed, you should be able change affiliation at voting booth.

[hack89]

35. Closed primaries are not a barrier to vote in the General Election

if you want to help a political party pick a nominee then you need to join the party. Not complicated.

[kcjohn1]

46. Not complicated

If you want to vote, you need register.

If you want to vote, get an voter idea.

Sounds very Republicans. This fear of cross over voters with GOPers sabotaging is similar to fears of voting fraud

[hack89]

48. Conflating primaries with the GE is disingenuous.

there should be as few barriers to vote in the GE as possible. Allowing political parties to pick their own candidates is a completely separate issue - you don't need to be part of one to participate in the other.

[kcjohn1]

49. Its two party system

These aren't some small hobby private clubs.

If the primaries has similar voter turnout as in the general you wouldn't have candidates like Trump/Hillary who are uniformly hated by the voting population.

[hack89]

50. Ok. nt

[Vincardog]

78. Why? Don't we want candidates that appeal to as many voters as possible? When Independents outnumber

Democrats why oppose them getting involved?
Don't we all want the party to grow?
How can it grow without getting new people involved?

[hack89]

79. If a Dem candidate appeals to an Independent

Then that Independent should be motivated to become a Dem. It is not that hard.

[Vincardog]

80. Giving them a candidate to support is a motivator.

[Amimnoch]

119. If your earlier statement is true, then apparently not much of a motivator. Nt.

[Silver_Witch]

12. We are probably in big trouble...

it will be okay though - all things resolve over time.

[peace13]

13. In 2012 it looks like 21 States had open primary's.

Anyone have the number for 2016?

[Eric J in MN]

17. 15 states has open primaries to allocate delegates this year

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016

[peace13]

22. Thanks.

[tirebiter]

14. It's not like there's a poll tax, just the need to register.

We're talking about intraparty elections not general referendums.

[Lord Magus]

15. Open primaries are broadly opposed by many Democrats, though.

We don't want Republican saboteurs to be invading our nominating process.

[msongs]

16. we have an open primary...it's called the GENERAL election where you can write in your fave

[kerry-is-my-prez]

122. +1000

[Vote2016]

18. I'm not as sure as you that all Democrats want to increase democratic access to the process

[pnwmom]

19. The Congressional Black Caucus strongly opposes open primaries

because in too many districts it will dilute the voting strength of minority voters, who are already dealing with gerrymandered districts.

So it isn't as simple as it may appear.

Some people think that declaring oneself to be a Democrat, at least for a month before the primary, isn't too much to ask.

[MFM008]

20. No open primaries

Democrat primaries should be for democrats, not crossover tepublicans.

[Contrary1]

21. Good luck with that thought

All one needs to do is check out the Sanders forum. Most are gone. With entire threads disappearing, who can blame them?

[leftofcool]

23. I'm with the CBC. No open primaries.

[stonecutter357]

26. Open Primaries ? Hell no, Democratic party Members only.......thanks.

[Her Sister]

29. No to Open Primaries and caucuses! No no no

Wanna vote in the Democratic Primary, JOIN! It's free to join.

[kcjohn1]

51. Want to vote? Register. It's free. n/t

[Chan790]

31. Progressives need to stick to their guns on the open primaries.

They're worth walking away from any effort for common ground over.

[w4rma]

62. Our open primaries, in Virginia, always go without a hitch.

The fear of open primaries is solely an incumbent protection plan.

[LongtimeAZDem]

84. You have less of a problem with crossover mischief

because both primaries are on the same day.

[w4rma]

90. The primaries *should* be all on the same day. (nt)

[LongtimeAZDem]

93. I agree, but even then

if your own party has sewn up the nomination, you are free to influence the other.

Regardless, registration lets the parties know who their constituents are. "Independents" run the full spectrum if ideologies from left to right, and polls show that most independents are center-right. So, if the party has to look outside of their registered base, that is who they will try to appeal to.

If self-described progressives want to pull the party to the left, then they need to sign up and be counted; otherwise, candidates will be forced to look elsewhere.

[w4rma]

94. Have you seen the laws in some of these closed primary states? They prevent people from registering.

They prevent young people from voting in primaries. They have the lowest turnouts of any primary elections in the entire nation. You can't support that and call yourself democratic.

[LongtimeAZDem]

96. You'll have to provide specifics for me to answer,

but even if you are correct, those are problems with registration, and have nothing to do with crossover voting.

I can say that in Arizona, it is ridiculously easy to register to vote; you can even do it online.

[w4rma]

99.  New York Had the Second-Lowest Voter Turnout So Far This Election Season

As a result, only 19.7 percent of eligible New Yorkers cast a ballot, the second-lowest voter turnout among primary states after Louisiana, according to elections expert Michael McDonald. There were over 900 calls from frustrated voters to the Election Protection Coalition, more than in any other primary state.
https://www.thenation.com/article/new-york-had-the-second-lowest-voter-turnout-so-far-this-election-season/

[LongtimeAZDem]

100. And none of the problems in the article were because of closed primaries themselves

New York has major problems with their voter registration, but that in no way is an argument for open primaries at all.

[w4rma]

101. All of the problems had to do with the closed primaries themselves. Registering for them is hard and

is easy to manipulate. Two very high ranking election officials were caught manipulating registrations and were suspended, without pay, for it. They are expected to be fired.

[Amimnoch]

120. Now there's an argument I can get behind.

I'm completely opposed to open primaries, but I do agree it should be easy for those who want to register Democrat and join in the primary process.

I found registering Democratic Party, and staying that way for more than a couple of decades very easy where I live. If the laws in some states are making it difficult to declare yourself a Democratic Party voter, that should be a common ground/common cause goal to change it.

[justiceischeap]

32. I'll chime in and say open primaries are a bad idea

Seriously, if Indies want to participate in closed primaries, change your damn status prior to the primary. It really is that simple but instead people complain about closed primaries because they're too lazy to change their affiliation.

[Lord Magus]

109. Some people think they'd sully their purity by joining a party.

I really don't see any reason for the Democratic Party to cater to such nonsense.

[Recursion]

33. I'm not at all a fan of open primaries; party members should get to decide candidates

Automatic voter registration I'm 100% in favor of.

[hack89]

34. Nothing simple or good about open primaries.

How about we let Democrats pick Democratic nominees?

[Evergreen Emerald]

39. At my caucus many who supported Sanders

said they were libertarian would never support a democrat (other than Sanders).

[pnwmom]

70. The libertarian economic philosophy is the complete opposite of socialism,

so those people are idiots.

Or maybe they came as disrupters. Hurting Hillary in the primary would assist Johnson in the general.

[Maru Kitteh]

88. weed. nt

[pnwmom]

89. Apparently it's addled their brains. If they have brains. n/t

[Maru Kitteh]

91. Somebody at a kegger told them they should be a libertarian

They said "What's a libertarian?

"you can smoke all the weed you want man"

"cool. I'm a fucking libertarian."

"right on"

[Lord Magus]

111. Libertarian: a Republican who owns a bong. -nt-

[LongtimeAZDem]

129. LOL (nt)

[BlueMTexpat]

71. Ding! Ding! Ding!

We have a winner.

And scrap caucuses too!

[Maru Kitteh]

86. Translation: I like weed.

No serious libertarian would be on board with free healthcare for all, free college for all and $15 minimum wage. Libertarians already think republicans are way too liberal on these kinds of issues.

[Evergreen Emerald]

87. hahaha that is pretty funny. n/t

[Blue_Adept]

40. The problem is that you're envisioning reform as one side as being completely and utterly right

And as you'll see even in this thread, several Bernie supporters of various persuasions are NOT in favor of what's claimed as being desired.

Automatic registration? YES PLEASE

Open primaries? Those with lengthy experience in how primaries work beyond this singular experience are largely (not entirely) against it. There are variations to be sure.

But you know what? The way to change it? You have to work within the STATE. Primary designs are NOT controlled by the "Party" as a whole or the DNC. It's entirely the state or state party itself.

So get involved locally. And remember that what works for YOU may not work for ME. New York does what it does, MA does what it does, and largely people are generally pretty pleased by how it unfolds.

[BlueMTexpat]

73. Good response!

Thanks!

[Yonnie3]

41. I'm a "no-brainer" then

No caucuses - because they are difficult for many of our party members to express their choice.
No open primaries - semi-open maybe. I want Democrats controlling their candidate choice.

BTW: Telling people that you want to agree with you that it is a "no-brainer" to disagree with you is really not a good way to start a discussion.

[randome]

56. No, it is not.

[workinclasszero]

42. Automatic voter registration when turning 18

I could support but never open primaries.

Why the hell should republicans, greens and independents have a say over who the democratic candidate is going to be?

Thats BS IMO.

And what about totally un-democratic caucuses? They should be abolished immediately!

No outrage over that eh?

[Tarc]

43. We are not going to more open primaries, ever.

If you want to vote in the Democratic Party primaries, then you can damned well find them time to register.

[Lil Missy]

44. No to Open Primaries, get rid of Caucus instead. And it's not necessary to be in complete agreement

with Bernie supporters.

[Hortensis]

54. Agree. It's not and even silly to imagine

there should be.

Most Bernie and Hillary supporters actually agreestrongly on most issues, anyway. There are a few, like our OP, who see almost nothing but points of disagreement, and that is their opinion.

Btw, Bernie said earlier that he will vote for Hillary because defeating the Republicans is our top priority. believe that is about as far as he will go in supporting her.

[Agnosticsherbet]

53. Curious, How much of that can be done without a state legislature and governors.

The state parties can decide to use a caucus or a primary, but automatic voter registration and open or closed primaries appear to be in the hands of state legislatures.

I like California style semi-open primaries. Let independents and decline to state voters join the Democratic Party by requesting a Democratic Primary Ballot.
For State Offices, I also like the top to winners in the primary are the candidates in the general.

[Gothmog]

59. Neither of those proposals are in the control of the party

The CBC is strongly against open primaries and the CBC has far more clout than Sanders

[insta8er]

60. hidden

[jzodda]

61. No Open primaries and LESS Super delegates

Open primaries lend themselves to republican tricks. Rush limbaugh in 2008 lead something called "operation chaos" a plan to cause havoc and extend the primary between Clinton and Obama. Since then its been simple for me.

As to delegates we certainly don't need 700! Limit it to members of Congress and governors and maybe cabinet officials. That's still close to if not more than 300.

Compromise! Or we are all the losers.

[LiberalFighter]

63. Automatic voter registration should be fine.

Just work out the fine details such as when a person moves so that their registration is transferred to their new address automatically too.

Open primaries is not acceptable. Voters need to determine the party they will belong to. And only they get to decide their nominee.

[PAMod]

64. No open primaries.

You want to participate in a primary, join the party. Far as I know, we've never turned anyone away from joining.

[fun n serious]

65. No Open primaries.

Democrats pick their democratic nominee. I do not see why people can not register as a dem.

[AgingAmerican]

67. That way the DNC can dictate who the candidate will be

A formula for disaster.

[fun n serious]

81. Explain this.

I mean, why not register as a dem? Otherwise we would not be democrats in a democratic party. Name change to the indy party next?

[Andy823]

66. No brainer

Get rid of caucuses, automatic voter registration at 18, and NO open primaries. I also think voting by mail, as we do in Washington state, is also a good idea.

[zappaman]

68. no open primaries.

By the time CA voted, Trump was the nominee.
Why would we want Trump supporters voting for the weaker Dem candidate?
Cuz you know they would if they could, right?

[LongtimeAZDem]

103. That appears to be exactly what they did in West Virginia (nt)

[BlueMTexpat]

69. Open primaries - NEVER!!

If one wants to vote for a primary candidate, one should be registered in the party for the candidate they vote for. Period.

Otherwise, why even bother to have a primary election cycle?

This has ONLY been an issue in 2016. I wonder why.

[NastyRiffraff]

82. Your concern is noted n/t

[Maru Kitteh]

92. Right? nt

[DemonGoddess]

95. automatic registration, sure

but no open contests. Thing is, with automatic registration, they damn well better educate these young voters as to what they need to do when it comes to voting, and not just every 4 years.

[w4rma]

102. You can't have automatic registration without open primaries. It is either both or neither.

You can't be "automatically" registered to vote in the primaries if you have to openly choose a party.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

121. When people say automatic registration they mean the general election

Not the primaries.

[CrowCityDem]

104. It's not simple at all.

I don't want to be looking at a scenario where we are facing an incumbent Republican, and every member of their party can vote for our weakest candidate to help them win. That would be absurd. Closed primaries have a very real purpose

[w4rma]

105. Yeah, to lower turnout and protect incumbents. (nt)

[Lord Magus]

114. No, to let Democrats choose who represented the Democratic Party.

Why should Republicans get to vote on who the Democratic nominee is?

[CrowCityDem]

117. I gave valid reasoning. You chose to see something that wasn't there.

[Skid Rogue]

107. I'm a little disappointed.

I don't want Sanders to have much of a say about how our primaries are conducted. I don't think he likes our party very much. However, with an issue like the minimum wage we need to aim high, because the arrow will always land lower.

[Skid Rogue]

123. Honestly...

Simply answer. American families need a bigger income. If we aimed at 20 dollars an hour, we'd probably get 12. Unfortunately, it really won't be up to the President.

[Amimnoch]

118. Automatic voter registration is great. To hell with open primaries.

They should all be closed primaries, and I'm good with that not going into effect until 2014 so that it can't just be a benefit Hillary statement.

If you want to vote in a DEMOCRATIC primary, then have the strength of character to declare yourself a DEMOCRAT. If not, you have the right to vote for whomever you want in the GE.

The Democratic Party is NOT a government body or entity. There are no rights to vote to determine who is on Democratic party tickets. Democrats should decide who runs on Democratic party tickets.

You want to be an independent or non affiliated. That's everyones right, I support that right, but if you choose to go that route, then you don't deserve to have any voice at all in the selection of candidates who are in the party that I proudly declare myself a part of.

[riversedge]

125. I agree...but

you might want to change that date in your first line.

[ericson00]

134. autovoter registration, OK, but we don't need open primaries and ending superdelegates

the GOP's nomination of Trump should show us why Superdelegates exist in the first place.