2016 Postmortem

blueintelligentsia

(507 posts) Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:40 PM Mar 2016

Poll: Are open presidential primaries more democratic? [View all]

Comment on why you voted Yes or No and please refrain from negative comments about Sanders or Clinton, that detract from a constructive discussion.

62 votes, 1 pass \| Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	43 (69%)
	No
	19 (31%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

119 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Poll: Are open presidential primaries more democratic? [View all] blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 OP

Democrats should decide Democratic nominee.. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #1

That wasn't the question. morningfog Mar 2016 #3

I already voted. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #8

And that wasn't the question either. morningfog Mar 2016 #9

Im unorthodox. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #14

Again, not the question. morningfog Mar 2016 #20

your queation is a push poll and doesn't deserve any relply upaloopa Mar 2016 #41

It's not my question. morningfog Mar 2016 #57

I Agree-If They Want to Run Against Democrats Let Them Start a 3rd Party Stallion Mar 2016 #10

absolutely - register for the party if you want to vote for the party's nominee DrDan Mar 2016 #110

Allowing People To Vote As They See Fit Optimizes The Quality of The General Election Candidates CorporatistNation Mar 2016 #118

Yes, by definition, they are. morningfog Mar 2016 #2

Bingo. I think you have diagnosed poster #1 accurately. JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #4

But teabagging the polls is undemocratic. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #12

Teabagging the polls....what does that mean? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #16

Like Republicans crossing party lines to exploit the turnout. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #19

Couldn't you argue the opposite? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #25

So we'll be all choosing from the bottom of the barrel? JaneyVee Mar 2016 #30

or they cancel eath other out....and we're left with our current system... blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #75

However one votes, for whatever reason is an act of democracy. morningfog Mar 2016 #17

They can do that in the general election. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #24

"allegedly rampant"....it sounds like fear is controlling your opinion? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #26

Republicans cant be trusted. See: Arizona 2016 JaneyVee Mar 2016 #33

Normally we run Dems against Dems. But this year and independent puts on a Dem hat and calls all upaloopa Mar 2016 #47

How dare a candidate bring independent voters into the Democrstic party! morningfog Mar 2016 #62

If you want to register to vote in a closed primary you can it is simple just follow the rules upaloopa Mar 2016 #68

I never said otherwise. This thread is about whether morningfog Mar 2016 #72

Yeah, but more democratic isn't necessarily better in a party primary. Orsino Mar 2016 #97

No. Dawson Leery Mar 2016 #5

If you're going to comment, don't just echo your vote please nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #11

Primaries aren't really about "democracy", per se. Codeine Mar 2016 #6

THIS ^^^^ eom radical noodle Mar 2016 #40

"Joe Dipshit"...refrain from the name calling, thank you. nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #42

Joe's cool. We go way back. Codeine Mar 2016 #46

The 2 big political parties have an institutional monopoly on the political process. Cheese Sandwich Mar 2016 #76

I don't really buy the notion of "independents". Codeine Mar 2016 #83

I changed my registration from Dem to independent because we got a new boss at work and he hated Dem Cheese Sandwich Mar 2016 #84

YEP!!!!! bravenak Mar 2016 #80

This is the correct answer. And I say fuck Joe Dipshit. PeaceNikki Mar 2016 #109

I think all democratic primaries should be closed... BooScout Mar 2016 #7

What if only registered independents could? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #13

Nope... BooScout Mar 2016 #35

Who was she and who replaced her? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #45

That wasn't the question. morningfog Mar 2016 #18

Open primaries are more democratic hellofromreddit Mar 2016 #15

All They Would Have to Do is Register as a Democrat Stallion Mar 2016 #21

The party left me - I didn't leave the party FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #31

Neither the World Nor the Democratic Party Revolves Around You Stallion Mar 2016 #38

The curse of our Two-Party system beating down any independent candidate... blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #49

They will not win with out independents FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #56

Many thousands of voters have been turned away from the polls due to clerical errors. hellofromreddit Mar 2016 #37

In NY, that would have been the first Friday in October of last year, in order to vote in the Karma13612 Mar 2016 #58

how about caucuses JI7 Mar 2016 #22

That's all a whole different story, the coin tosses in IOWA, for another poll nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #28

Yes, they are, absolutely. Blue_In_AK Mar 2016 #23

Exactly! nt redwitch Mar 2016 #34

What would that restriction look like? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #51

Voting records. Blue_In_AK Mar 2016 #59

So perhaps a waiting period if you voted for a party and switched next election nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #73

That isn't what I was suggesting. Blue_In_AK Mar 2016 #91

For primaries in MO (presidential and state offices), you get a republican or Democratic ballot loyalsister Mar 2016 #104

Yes, I agree, that's a good idea. Blue_In_AK Mar 2016 #111

Geez ... another No Shit Sherlock moment FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #27

The vote doesn't look that way.....nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #32

I voted no radical noodle Mar 2016 #29

What if that someone doesn't want to screw around with the election? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #36

There's no way to weed out those who do from those who don't radical noodle Mar 2016 #44

Alaska also has a closed caucus, Blue_In_AK Mar 2016 #43

Are you aware that in Karma13612 Mar 2016 #50

Any new yorkers here to weigh in? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #52

Former New Yorker here. I weighed in against the New York rule -- see post #99. Jim Lane Mar 2016 #100

As far as I'm concerned, this is a Party issue radical noodle Mar 2016 #64

They do a few things nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #39

They're not supposed to be. NuclearDem Mar 2016 #48

Precisely. Codeine Mar 2016 #55

Exactly. Primaries are one of the privileges of membership. NuclearDem Mar 2016 #61

They best start doing that ASAP, hopefully Clinton (if she wins) will reach out effectively nt. blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #65

From a simple google search.... blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #60

I think that has less to do with party membership NuclearDem Mar 2016 #69

This message was self-deleted by its author imari362 Mar 2016 #53

I voted "pass" Dem2 Mar 2016 #54

When do they have to decide which side? nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #63

At the polling station Dem2 Mar 2016 #66

That exactly what I envision to be an open primary...nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #67

Some states allow party crossover Dem2 Mar 2016 #81

I'm confused... blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #87

IF they are a registered independant Dem2 Mar 2016 #93

I'm registered independent Hydra Mar 2016 #70

We have a similar system in CA..."modified closed primary" nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #71

Democracy means you can start a party and run it how you want, if you don't like how others do. CalvinballPro Mar 2016 #74

Though it has largely always been two-party system... blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #77

It doesn't have to be a 2-party system. It's not written into the Constitution or anything. CalvinballPro Mar 2016 #78

Social Democratic Party....nt blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #79

Of course they are. Major Hogwash Mar 2016 #82

The most democratic thing you can do is let people vote for whomever they want onecaliberal Mar 2016 #85

people who CHOOSE to be independent have self-selected themselves out of political party primaries. msongs Mar 2016 #86

People should be able to vote for whomever they want to. PERIOD! pinebox Mar 2016 #88

^^THIS^^ CharlotteVale Mar 2016 #116

Democracy is about the people, not the party. senz Mar 2016 #89

Yes Rebkeh Mar 2016 #90

More people voting = more democratic. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #92

I think so. So, yes. (nt) bigwillq Mar 2016 #94

In my state I am glad only registered Democrats can vote in my primary. hrmjustin Mar 2016 #95

I'm not always happy about it, but yes. Vinca Mar 2016 #96

Primaries are meant to pick the nominee of a specific party. KitSileya Mar 2016 #98

On the main question, I'm undecided, but I will speak against the extremely closed NY primary Jim Lane Mar 2016 #99

No! As long as there are vote machines and tabulators owned by private companies bkkyosemite Mar 2016 #101

Not when votes are being suppresed and it's impossible to trust a bought out party not to block a Zira Mar 2016 #102

Should football writers join baseball writers in voting for inductees to the Baseball Hall of Fame? LonePirate Mar 2016 #103

Who gets into the Hall of Fame does not have major implications for the welfare Time for change Mar 2016 #115

If Independents truly cared about the welfare of our country, why aren't they Dems already? LonePirate Mar 2016 #117

Certainly more democratic, because it give more people a voice. Maedhros Mar 2016 #105

No. LuvLoogie Mar 2016 #106

I am an indepdent who has voted straight Democrat for decades pdsimdars Mar 2016 #107

I am also - and I accept and respect the fact that I cannot vote in our primary DrDan Mar 2016 #112

Democrats should decide Democratic nominee.. workinclasszero Mar 2016 #108

They are about influencing unaffiliated voters. One_Life_To_Give Mar 2016 #113

Why should independent voters be disenfranchised Time for change Mar 2016 #114

Just cut out the middle man DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #119