Bernie Sanders supporters sue to have California's voter registration extended until election day
Source: LA Times
A federal lawsuit alleging widespread confusion over California's presidential primary rules asks that voter registration be extended past Monday's deadline until the day of the state's primary election on June 7.
"Mistakes are being made," said William Simpich, an Oakland civil rights attorney who filed the lawsuit Friday.
At issue is whether voters understand the rules for the presidential primary, which differ from those governing other elections in California.
Unlike statewide primaries — where voters now choose any candidate, no matter the political party — the presidential contests are controlled by the parties themselves. Democrats have opened up their primary between Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders to voters that have no political affiliation, known in California as having "no party preference."
Read more: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-bernie-sanders-supporters-lawsuit-california-voter-confusion-20160522-snap-story.html
*Click link to read the entire article*
I'd like to weigh in with what I know. I've heard the root cause of this is that election officials and some volunteers were giving these "no party preference" voters the wrong ballot. Only about 15% of these voters have turned in the correct ballot. What they need is the cross-over ballot.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Squinch
(59,383 posts)according to rules that have been in place for decades, so now they need to stamp their feet and demand that the rules be changed for their little selves.
That is what is known as assholery.
Arkansas Granny
(32,265 posts)Response to Arkansas Granny (Reply #2)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Arkansas Granny
(32,265 posts)That was all I wanted to say.
However, if you feel you deserve more, let me flesh that out a bit. It's too bad that Bernie's campaign staff didn't research the registration process for the California primary sooner instead of demanding changes at the last minute. They might have been able to help voters register properly.
Is that better?
LeFleur1
(1,197 posts)1. They don't have to follow rules. If someone questions them on WHY they couldn't follow rules like everyone else they say things are rigged.
2. If people just move ahead, following rules, the Berners scream, they threaten, they bump, they shout down speakers who know a lot more than they do, and they do it because they think they are S P E C I A L.
3. They scream "RIGGED" after every state Bernie loses. But you never, ever hear the word if Bernie wins.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)What difference does it make when they register?
.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)it.
They have until Monday.
California is one of the most progressive states for voter registration
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)It explains that mistakes have been made in the forms mailed out to voters. It does not mention that some instructions mailed out specified the last day to request a cross-over ballot was wrong too.
In the last day or so a couple of videos have been posted here, one by a woman who was being trained on how to help voters and the training classes are giving out the wrong information to the attendees too. She called attention to it, but doesn't know how they plan on fixing it, or if they will even do anything.
But I'm not surprised at your attitude here. Just looked and yes indeed, you have a long list of hides under your yellow button. How did I miss you? Buh Bye! 
Plonk
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)with an added 'ker-' at the front, for good measure
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)The state got jammed up, gave out some wrong info and forms, and now should deal with that. Something equitable should be doable.
TeamPooka
(25,577 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Squinch
(59,383 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)I thought that's what Dems were about? 
It's the GOP that is supposed to be the ones who want all the rules and regulations for voting. Because the right wing always does better the less people vote.
.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts).
Squinch
(59,383 posts)all the time.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Simple question.
The logical conclusion is that you don't want more people to vote. If that's not it then why do you care if more people get to vote in the Dem Primary and have their voices heard and have a chance to also be involved in picking one of the two candidates to run for president?
.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)voting. If people in California want to vote, and they run into trouble, all they need to do is go online and re-register as Democrats.
That is all. Nothing more. And this is nothing new.
Registering to vote in California is something that no one but BS supporters has a problem with.
But instead of googling how to vote in California and seeing how simple it is, and seeing that no one is being disenfranchised, you are going to tell me about how I am just one big disenfranchiser. You're going to approach me with the insult that I want to stop people from voting. You're going to imply that I am trying to keep people from having their voices heard.
The problem is not me. The problem is BS and his victim brigade. For whom everything has to be changed, in every state, in every situation. Not to improve any situation, just to throw a chair, either literally or figuratively. Senseless drama 24/7.
I used to really like reading your posts. I thought you had something to say. Now I find nothing in your posts but this kind of insulting, projection shit that is not worth the time it takes to read them.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)registration in CA, why not?
That is the question. You are deflecting away from that with your complaints about Bernie and his supporters. They are trying to allow more people to vote and to make it easier for people to vote. So what's wrong with that?
Seriously, when the GOP wants people to not have an easier time voting we are all upset. So I'm wondering why you have a problem with it. You started off immediately complaining about Bernie and his supporters in such a harsh and insulting manner I am wondering why you feel so strongly that this is such a terrible, "assholery" thing, to help more people vote?
And as an aside, are you actually complaining about my posts - triggered by this exchange oddly enough - when you started this all off with this post? Talk about projection. Wow!
Well I just perused some more of this OP's thread and it seems you are being a sweetheart all over the place. The nerve of you to say what you said to me here. Unfuckingbelievable. Zero integrity.
.
R B Garr
(17,980 posts)for Bernie supporters who they have been recruiting on campuses and obviously they need more busloads of them to make a difference so the entire state needs to change the rules to accommodate them.
I can't imagine the rioting that would occur if Hillary had filed a lawsuit to force an entire state to accommodate her voters.
It's not hard to register to vote. They've had this entire year to figure it out. This is all just an excuse, and look how they hide behind democracy all the time when they are actually subverting it. They think the rest of the world doesn't notice.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)The complaint is that the Democratic Party ballot is WIDE OPEN to everyone, but not everyone knows it. No matter how many places it was posted over the years, those who were not paying attention at the time were not going to notice it.
This is, of course, a blatant attempt to have the people of California pay for a special pro-Sanders GOTV effort--and give them more time for it. Just like the GOP's attempt to have governments tilt elections to the GOP by requiring official photo IDs of everyone, this would benefit Sanders far more than Hillary because her voters trend more experienced and aware.
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)many were given the wrong ballot when they went to vote. There is a specific ballot that "no party preference" voters have to use. They are supposed to use the cross-over ballot but were given non-partisan ballots which don't include presidential nominees, only state and local elections and proposals.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)they are told about this issue and warned at "No, I do not want to disclose a political party preference. (If you select no, you may not be able to vote for some parties' candidates at a primary election for the U.S. president or party committee.)
I'm all for making voting as accessible as possible for everyone. This is a college-level nation, and many people simply are not equipped to handle it. But reality is that all voters are equallly notified at registration and again at the polling places of this issue, as well as in newspaper and on-line articles, Bernie Sanders activists on line, and so on, just not necessarily by volunteer babysitters sitting behind the tables on voting day.
BERNIE SANDERS is bringing this suit at this time to give him a special advantage, hardly the first or second, or third time he has tried to use the courts to manipulate the electoral process.
You can bet some Hillary voters are confused about various things also, that some for instance have bad eyesight, the poll workers only speak English, etc., but it is not Hillary, it is BERNIE SANDERS who is using this opportunity to try to generate biased media attention, further the inexcusable lie that he and his voters are being victimized by a rigged system, and specifically to manipulate the system to give him additional advantage.
This is the official California voter registration screen, extensively explained by a Sanders group, but the screen actually does a good job of explaining it very succinctly and does not allow people to continue on until a decision is made. Note the partially hidden warning.
Voting in Presidential Primary Elections
Voters who registered to vote without stating a political party preference are known as No Party Preference (NPP) voters. NPP voters were formerly known as "decline-to-state" or “DTS” voters.
For presidential elections: NPP voters, unless they choose otherwise (see below), will receive a “non-partisan” ballot that does not include presidential candidates. A nonpartisan ballot contains only the names of candidates for voter-nominated offices and local nonpartisan offices and measures.
Voting in the June 7, 2016, Presidential Primary Election
An NPP voter will receive a non-partisan ballot, which will have no presidential candidates listed.
However, upon request, an NPP voter can instead vote the presidential ballot of the following parties:
American Independent Party
Democratic Party
Libertarian Party
Why? Each political party has the option of allowing NPP voters to vote in their presidential primary election. 135 days before the election, political parties must notify the Secretary of State's office whether or not they will allow NPP voters to vote in their presidential primary election. The above three parties notified the Secretary of State that they will allow NPP voters to request their party’s presidential ballot for the June 7, 2016, Presidential Primary Election.
How to request a party ballot? The NPP voter may ask their county elections office or poll worker, at their polling place, for a ballot for one of the above three parties. An NPP voter may not request more than one party's ballot.
A vote-by-mail voter is who is also an NPP voter may contact their county elections office or complete and mail or deliver a vote-by-mail ballot application to their county elections office. The vote-by-mail ballot application must arrive by May 31, 2016.
The following three parties notified the Secretary of State that they have chosen not to allow NPP voters to request their party’s presidential ballot participate in their presidential primary election:
Republican
Green
Peace & Freedom
If an NPP voter wants to vote for a presidential candidate in the Republican, Green, or Peace and Freedom party, the NPP voter must re-register to vote with one of those parties by May 23, 2016. To register online go to registertovote.ca.gov.
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/no-party-preference/
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)This is just one of the issues. Another one is information mailed out with a deadline to request a mail-in ballot of May 18, when in fact it is May 31. And other forms were sent out with other wrong dates as well. This is what the law suite is about.
Maybe instead of insulting all the no party voters in Cali, you might want to inform yourself of what is actually going on.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)It does seem as if California voters are sent their ballots ahead of time but if they are registered as "no party preferred" they have to request ballots for the presidential primary races for those parties that allow independent voters to vote in their primaries - Democratic, Libertarian and American Independent Party.
From the link in the OP:
"Counties have been gearing up for this for well over a year," Kelley said.
<SNIP>
Kelley said "no party preference" voters can easily resolve problems on election day — including those who didn't receive the ballot they wanted in the mail.
"They can take that ballot in and surrender it," he said. "There’s no need to vote a provisional ballot in that case."
A candidate who is relying on "no party preferred" voters should have been and still can provide information to them as to the procedures and what to do if they get the wrong ballot in the mail.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)and reregister, which they can do through Monday, all of this is just another boatload of BS from BS and the bros.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)And what the second video that passiveporcupine posted says - take whatever incorrect ballot they got to the elections office or to the polls, turn it in and request the correct one.
As for the first video passiveporcupine posted, the correct information does need to be given to the poll workers. What I don't understand is why the woman (who was at the training and who had the correct information) didn't raise holy hell DURING the training. Why she accept the incorrect information and not make sure the poll workers who were with her were given the right procedures is beyond me.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)csziggy
(34,189 posts)Which was originally posted to Twitter but is now on YouTube. WARNING - she's very much into what used to be called Valley Girl accent.
If what she relates is true, there is a problem with the training for poll workers - but there is time to make sure they all get the correct information so no one who wants to vote a cross over ballot is denied that right.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)fairly? without it being a maze of confusion to figure out how to get to vote?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Squinch
(59,383 posts)I have little doubt that Hillary people will be able to figure it out just fine. We're good at that voting thing.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)
Duckfan
(1,268 posts)...seem to be the one's at blocking peoples ability to vote. Time to get your head out of that orifice and read a little more often.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)
And interestingly, all thirteen million of them were able to follow their states' long standing primary rules!
I know, I know. They're all corrupt members of the conspiracy against you and BS.
seekthetruth
(504 posts).... requiring a bunch of independents to follow absurd rules that the establishment made up to keep only establishment candidates viable. NY would have gone to Sanders if it weren't for assholery rules.
Establishment Dems make me sick.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)to Sanders.
I wish you guys would quit blaming everyone else and the 
establishment (which term, by the way, you have made meaningless) for your own disorganization.
And PS, how is it disenfranchisement when the solution is to log onto their computers and reregister as Democrats, which they can do through Monday?
I don't think disenfranchisement means what you think it means.
seekthetruth
(504 posts)As it always does?
If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
And yes, New York would have gone to Sanders because if New York is as truly as progressive as everyone says it is, then by logic it has to go to Sanders because he is the only Progressive running on the Democrat side. That is if we had fair rules that welcomed anyone. The reason for all of this is that the Democratic Party is attempting to nominate a conservative neoliberal......NOT a progressive.
The other candidate believes in neoliberal economic policies that have crippled the American workforce in the past few decades.
I don't think you understand the true Progressive in this race. Yes, a purity test. If purity means that you believe in a more equitable government, then you cannot support Clinton. If you believe that we should continue a horrendous and poisonous practice such as fracking, then you cannot claim the progressive platform and then become a neoliberal Democrat. Worlds apart from Sanders supporters (who are progressive & liberal). The Democratic Party is no longer progressive or liberal.
If you believe that the free market can help solve problems such as healthcare, the finance industry, then you're a neoliberal Democrat.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)seekthetruth
(504 posts)...... because our own party has turned on us....and there are many more independents that are coming to Sanders vs. Clinton.
But go ahead and just assume that we'll fall in line and support the anointed one.....
Squinch
(59,383 posts)why you think the election is important. That's because you aren't that deep and because the rest of us have the same goals.
The thing is the rest of us would like to see those goals ACTUALLY met. We know that will take a lot of slogging work. We know that success won't just magically appear through the chanting of slogans and the slinging of chairs and the wagging of fingers.
BS was NEVER going to accomplish any of your goals because, as this primary proves, he does not know how to get things done. Hillary will accomplish some of your goals.
So you support whomever you damn well please, or stand in a corner and pout, or keep spouting the meaningless, jingoistic, tiresome script you people have been spewing for months about parties turning on you and anointed ones. That's on you.
I'll be working with the Democrats to defeat Trump, avert disaster, and move forward on Democratic goals.
seekthetruth
(504 posts)Personal attacks don't get us anywhere. For one, you have no idea who I am.....
If you realize the problem with your reasoning, then there's no point.
Support big oil. Support the corporate over people. There's where you stand. The Clintons have been getting many of the wrong things done. You want incrementalism....well that's fine. I don't. What you call "reality" or "pragmatism" I call being controlled by oligopolistic influences. I can see the influences behind Clinton. Why can't you? If you want to fall in line with the party, and not stand for anything, go ahead.
For the fuckin 15th millionth time...... Clinton and Trump are parts of the same coin, just different sides. Parts of the same broken system...... one's just sneakier than the other.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)This is why you guys lost.
seekthetruth
(504 posts)Not acknowledging the critiques of your candidate doesn't serve any purpose other than denial, arrogance, and movement towards the right.
That's why the Democratic Party is in such disarray.
It's not only about winning.....but I guess for you it is......."we won, we won, we won....."
Sounds almost like the Trump campaign, does it not?
Besides, defend Hillary's support for fracking.....
(I'm pretty sure you won't address that position of hers because, to you, it's a rather unimportant aspect of her platform. For me, and millions of others, it's what disqualifies her as a viable candidate.)
seekthetruth
(504 posts)seekthetruth
(504 posts).....thinking that Hillary is a liberal.
Duckfan
(1,268 posts)Because if they were allowed to vote, sorry for the hard truth, but Bernie WOULD have won NY.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)independents. We voted for her twice by huge margins. We'll do it again.
apnu
(8,790 posts)Indy's can't burn the candle at both ends.
If you're indy and don't want all the non-sense of party politics, then stay out of party politics. If you are interested in joining a party, find out the rules and join.
If "establishment" Dems piss you off enough to get involved, then get involved as a member of the party and start making changes at your local level.
This isn't that hard to figure out.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)it seems like its real hard for some of our friends here in DU.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Last edited Sun May 22, 2016, 07:17 PM - Edit history (1)
the wrong information was mailed out to people who filed as no party preference. They were told to use the wrong form and they were given the wrong deadline dates for changing their vote to democrat if they wanted to do it that way.
This is not people not knowing the rules. It's the wrong information being given out by the election departments in various counties in LA (and I think San Fran too), and even training precinct people to tell them to use the wrong forms. There have been a couple of videos posted here on DU about this already...but maybe you didn't want to watch them. But the info is there in the OP link:
They are supposed to be able to vote on a democratic cross-over ballot and instead are being told to ask for a provisional ballot.
This is not the error of voters.
So knock this shit off right now.
BTW, my post #106 has two videos that explain what went wrong that inspired this law suit.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)I went through this in New York. It was bullshit there, and there is no reason to believe it's anything other than bullshit in California.
Fact is, BS voters suck at registering. The rest of us seem to be doing it just fine.
Knock off your own shit.
And guess what? Sanders still lost.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)As much as you want to make it one.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1460350
Squinch
(59,383 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)and keep spreading those lies.
I guess you won't care about the lost Hillary votes either because of this screwup.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)
Squinch
(59,383 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)all or the way they registered. That has nothing to do with the "rules in place for decades" meme.
RogueTrooper
(4,666 posts)
Squinch
(59,383 posts)with this. It turns out that people of color are much better at voting than BS supporters.
RogueTrooper
(4,666 posts)I've watched Bernie Sandinista's supporters cover up their incompetence with accusations of corruption for months. And their patronizing white man's burden attitude towards PoC.
I was making fun of their white privilege.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)have accused me of wanting to disenfranchise people. I misunderstood and thought this was some of that.
Thank you for telling me.
RogueTrooper
(4,666 posts)
have a cold one on me pilgrim! 
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)
Squinch
(59,383 posts)out. Hillary has nothing to fear here. She already beat BS.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)away again!
Retrograde
(11,416 posts)This is the way California primaries have been run for years. Some years the Democrats let non-party-affiliated voters to vote in their primaries, some years the Republicans do: it's up to the party.
I'm No Party Preference, vote by mail. I got a card from my county registrar in March explaining (again) the rules and asking to reply by a certain date to get a Democratic, Libertarian or American-Independent ballot. I did, got the requested ballot, no problem. I also know that if I don't get my ballot within a reasonable amount of time I need to contact the county registrar and get the situation fixed (yes, problems happen, and talking to the right people often gets it fixed).
The California election is already in progress: early voting started May 9. I doubt any judge is going to tell the state that they have to start all over again because some people can't follow directions.
BTW, there is still time to 1) register 2) request a mail ballot and 3) get individual counties to address problems without going to court.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)It's because the fucking wrong information was not only mailed out to voters, it was also taught wrong to volunteers who are supposed to help cross-over voters do it right, but they've been informed to give them the wrong form.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)it's pretty sophisticated!
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)this isn't about Bernie or Hillary. It's about a huge fucking screwup by the democratic elections groups who are supposed to be telling people how to vote.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)your tizzy. We certainly don't want to distract you from it.
Duval
(4,280 posts)I'm sure we'll hear more about this, and my hope is that the plaintiffs win.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)These people can follow instructions on a drivers' license application but can't decipher a voter registration form.
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)At the bottom of the OP in the posters comments.
And it keeps them from Voting for Hillary as well as Bernie.
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)there are two ballots no party preference voters can use. The standard non-partisan ballot which excludes presidential nomination contests and the cross-over ballot which allows NPP voters to vote for a party candidate. But I want to make sure my opinion is clear; I don't think anything fishy went on here. I believe it was just a confusing rule that should be changed. They should allow the extension considering only 15% of this voting group (of 5 million people) will count and proves people weren't told they had to choose the cross-over ballot. And you're right, this effects Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as well.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)phony ballot card and are not according to the state policy. someone did screw up printing the phony ballot cards.
beastie boy
(13,283 posts)And it doesn't affect Trump at all. Only the Democratic primaries in California are open.
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)There are 7 million democratic voters in California, 4 million republican voters, and 5 million NPP (independent) voters. I would say that it is a very big deal for both of them.
beastie boy
(13,283 posts)This tread concerns the Democratic primary elections. No Hillary group signed up to the lawsuit in question. This tells me that the Hillary supporters, even the unaffiliated ones, are prepared for whatever eventualities brought about by the different ballots circulating among the unaffiliated voters. According to the article you cited, the difference between the "wrong" ballot and the "right" ballot is that you have to fill in the candidate's name in the former, and the latter has the name printed. I have full confidence in Hillary supporters to be able to write her name in.
Not sure if the plaintiffs have the same confidence in their members.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)please read my post #106. It explains what went wrong and why the law suit was filed. You don't know what you are talking about.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1460350
cstanleytech
(28,444 posts)the judge will step into this so close to the election, if they had filed this a few weeks ago maybe otherwise I just dont see it happening though I could of course be wrong which would not be a first :p lol
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)Because millions of people were able to complete the process with NO confusion.
This is about changing party preference from American Independent Party (which some people thought meant independent) to Dem or no party preference on or BEFORE May 23rd. I'm in NorCal and this was covered daily by local news stations on TV and their websites. They repeatedly told viewers if they wanted to vote in the DEM primary they had to change their party preference to either DEM or no party preference by May 23rd.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)It's wrong voting forms and information being mailed out, wrong training for volunteers, and even wrong deadline dates on when voters can ask for a cross-over ballot.
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)and only 15% of them have turned in the correct ballot.
Retrograde
(11,416 posts)The election started with early voting on May 9, and continues until 8PM on June 7: most people haven't voted yet.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)"They can take that ballot in and surrender it," he said. "There’s no need to vote a provisional ballot in that case."
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)And will have to go in instead.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)If you requested a vote-by-mail ballot, but would like to request a replacement ballot, you must submit a replacement ballot application. To request a replacement ballot, first look up your voter record. If you previously requested a vote-by-mail ballot, you will be given the option to complete a replacement ballot application.
http://www.ocvote.com/?id=1492
Or at https://www.ocvote.com/registration/verify-your-voter-registration/
Retrograde
(11,416 posts)I emailed the county registrar and they sent out a replacement the next day. There's still time to get this fixed.
Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)who "these people" are. Thank you in advance.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)that because not only does it allow more voters to take part but it would end all the flipping that we have seen in so many states this year.
If I go to vote and find out that somehow my registration was flipped from D to R I can immediately fix it and re-register right then. No cheating allowed.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)elections officials to catch election-day registration fraud. Often fraud only after elections is not contested. I like your system, but how about up to a short period before election day, long enough to at least do a basic screening of new and changed registrations through the databases?
Andy823
(11,555 posts)They seem to want the republicans to cross over and vote for Bernie, just like in other primaries, so they can try to pull out a win. Of course if he were to get the nomination, millions who once voted for him in the primaries would be voting for Trump in the GE. I guess that winning no matter what, and then losing in the GE is better for them that seeing Trump taken down. I know they will come back with how Bernie is the only one that can beat Trump, but he has had NO vetting whatsoever, and I now the republicans a ton of stuff ready to take him out should he win the nomination.
tazkcmo
(7,419 posts)" I guess that winning no matter what, and then losing in the GE..." The irony.
Andy823
(11,555 posts)Is believing that Bernie Sanders has "already" been vetted, or that he has NO baggage for Trump to use on him. Bernie is far from being squeaky clean.
reACTIONary
(7,143 posts)..... self-descrbed socialist ! He's already done the opo research for them.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)blocks of conservatives in each state who only voted to get him nominated so they could defeat him in the general are already enemies.
But wonder how all those indies and anti-establishment conservative-neutral wobblers would react to hearing the Kochs et ilk's character assassination industry's well-crafted lies about WHY he's hiding his tax records and how may be indicted for insider trading.
Lies about WHERE and WHO the $100 million he spent on this campaign "REALLY" came from, and the sinister subversive reasons why, with insinuations about his ties to Israel and the time he spent there.
Lies about how the low-level radioactive waste he shipped to Sierra Blanca was really high-level and the cancer rates are now through the ceiling down there, but carefully hidden by a conspiracy involving Senator Sanders and George Soros (they're both Jews, you know), with versions for special audiences about his ties to the Illuminati.
Lies to accompany pictures of him shaking hands with billionaires, neocons, commies (Sanders "honeymooned" in Russia," yeah, right, with the KBG!) and so on.
They usually prefer to make the most of problems and irregularities in the background, building them into amazing structures the gullible, the paranoids, and the malicious fools are eager to swallow, but stuff they just make up out of nothing also sells well.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)when comparing it to voter disenfranchisement.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)There is no significant issue with "voter fraud", that is a Puke dog whistle for "too easy for non-whites to vote".
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Squinch
(59,383 posts)voting problems that BS supporters have.
Zorro
(18,628 posts)Bernie's minions are the ones trying to create confusion in the California primary.
I think they're trying to set the stage for again crying foul when Sanders loses the state.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)Think about that.
Zorro
(18,628 posts)and are disturbed that they didn't get a Democratic ballot.
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)But they got the wrong ballot due to a confusing rule which offers them two different ballots, one without presidential nominees and one with. Only 15% have turned in the correct ballot which is a very low number and makes it worth challenging.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Buh Bye!
Plonk
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)most flexibles state for registration in the country
This alone tells me that is not qualified to be President
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)Third time I've posted this in the replies.
still_one
(98,883 posts)they were "given the wrong ballot", unless that is what they checked
They have had over a YEAR to register, and they would have gotten a confirmation from the SOS also
Everyone is against poor Bernie
They have until Monday to change it online
Nothing needs to be extended
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)I'd like to weigh in with what I know. I've heard the root cause of this is that election officials and some volunteers were giving these "no party preference" voters the wrong ballot. Only about 15% of these voters have turned in the correct ballot. What they need is the cross-over ballot.
still_one
(98,883 posts)have until Monday, the last day
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)If they do not make the request, those voters will receive a ballot with a blank space where partisan ballots list the presidential candidates.
The lawsuit alleges that some counties have not done an adequate job of informing these voters. A recent report by Political Data Inc., a company that is paid to analyze California voter information for candidates and campaigns, found relatively few unaffiliated voters have asked for a ballot with presidential candidates.
Thus, some have already turned in the wrong ballot and others are confused as to why no Presidential candidates are listed on their ballots.
still_one
(98,883 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)job and informing voters correctly.
still_one
(98,883 posts)how they were registered to vote, along with a sample ballot. It would have marked very clearly whether it was as a Democrat or nonpartisan.
How to request a party ballot? The NPP voter may ask their county elections office or poll worker, at their polling place, for a ballot for one of the above three parties. An NPP voter may not request more than one party's ballot.
A vote-by-mail voter is who is also an NPP voter may contact their county elections office or complete and mail or deliver a vote-by-mail ballot application to their county elections office. The vote-by-mail ballot application must arrive by May 31, 2016.
The following three parties notified the Secretary of State that they have chosen not to allow NPP voters to request their party’s presidential ballot participate in their presidential primary election:
Republican
Green
Peace & Freedom
If an NPP voter wants to vote for a presidential candidate in the Republican, Green, or Peace and Freedom party, the NPP voter must re-register to vote with one of those parties by May 23, 2016. To register online go to registertovote.ca.gov.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Really not that difficult to understand. It wasn't all counties just some of them.
Response to still_one (Reply #49)
Name removed Message auto-removed
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)They've been given the wrong ballot. They will mostly just try to use the wrong ballot and their votes won't be counted. It's not their fault. It's the election committees fault for mailing out bad ballots, bad information, and wrong dates of when to request a cross-over ballot.
They have already registered as no party preference and they are following the rules that have been sent to them, that are wrong.
Why can't you people see that?
And Steve is right. It affects both Hillary and Bernie. So don't complain when Hillary loses a ton of votes too.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)screaming? Where are the female party officials to insult?
It just isn't any fun!
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)It's about wrong information, dates and forms being mailed out to people. It affects both Bernie and Hillary.
liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)because I just couldn't stomach the dishonesty here any more, my version of DU on GE mode.
Of course the trolls and the pernicious anti-Democrats and hillhaters go, but I've also started blocking even those who seem very sincere and worried about "democracy" but never bothered to wonder if what they were told about the party, "establishment," "rigged system," or Hillary could be true, just swallowed the entire crooked-Democrats schtick whole.
The number who fall in that comparatively decent, but enormously ignorant and irresponsible type is turning out to be very large. We're going to have a new common ending for the old saying, "Dumb as a _____."
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts) CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2008/june/clinton_candidacy/hillary_timeline_09.html
May 31, 2008 The Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee decides to give only half-votes to delegates from Michigan and Florida. Both states held unsanctioned primaries, which Clinton won. The move dashes Clinton's hope that a rule change would help her close the delegate gap with Obama
http://www.seacoastonline.com/article/20080529/Opinion/805290418
The tight primary fight between Obama and Clinton is the reason why this has become a radioactive issue. Despite public statements to the contrary last year and now that Obama is on the verge of clinching the Democratic presidential nomination, Clinton has insisted on counting the beauty contest votes as legitimate and seating the delegations according to those votes.
While claiming to speak for the disenfranchised voters in Florida and Michigan — and while counting these votes into her overall popular vote total to make the case for her nomination — Clinton often fails to note the obvious: These major rule changes as the contest nears the end would benefit her and her alone.
Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #78)
Post removed
sweetloukillbot
(12,744 posts)Your point, other than two wrongs make a right?
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)That Hillary has sued to change the rules just for her benefit. IF you are going to point fingers at Bernie, remember he is in good company.
sweetloukillbot
(12,744 posts)LiberalFighter
(53,544 posts)If the people are not registered by now or haven't updated their political affiliation yet why would they do it if it is expanded?
Most people should be able to go online and register or even update their political affiliation. If they don't have internet access at home go to the library or go to a family or friend that does. It would be so much easier than going to the voter registration office.
still_one
(98,883 posts)and it doesn't look like he will be able to garner a greater than 30% win in California, where I live
scscholar
(2,902 posts)but that still excludes people without Internet access.
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)They are registered properly.
LiberalFighter
(53,544 posts)They want to extend the deadline for voter registration.
The issue you bring up has two different solutions. Both not really the best. If they were registered properly and were given the wrong ballot they can call to get the correct ballot. Or vote in person on election day after surrendering the incorrect ballot. Make sure to call the election board to confirm what to do.
"They can take that ballot in and surrender it," he said. "There’s no need to vote a provisional ballot in that case."
In both cases, this has been in the news since late April.
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts) LiberalFighter
(53,544 posts)I have never had a problem with voting by mail since 2006. I haven't heard of any problems either with anyone else.
I did notice that there was a problem with another election in a county in CA with the printing company.
Yes, not being able to do it by mail is a bummer when that is the preference. But, at least back up provisions are in place if something like that happens.
still_one
(98,883 posts)year to do it
Hell, they can do it right now online, and they have until Monday.
Grow up
This is the real world
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)This is about people receiving the wrong ballot. There are two available ballots for no party preference voters; non-partisan ballot and cross-over ballot. Only 15% of these 5 million voters have turned in the correct ballot. That points to them either not being told they needed the cross-over ballot or over 4 million of them just decided voting for their choice nominee wasn't important considering presidential nominations are excluded from the non-partisan ballots. That is why they are asking for an extension to make sure everybody is able to cast their vote.
still_one
(98,883 posts)ThinkCritically
(241 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)received the wrong one. By re-registering AS A DEMOCRAT RIGHT NOW, they would get the Democratic ballot. Problem solved
If instead they want to go through the process of saying, why should I have to re-register because I already registered, sue the court, hope they get a hearing in time, and hope they get a ruling in their favor, then be my guest
I provided a simple solution.
In fact if they would have registered as a Democrat in the first place instead of NPP, it wouldn't be an issue, but that's fine something got screwed up.
Also, the issue shouldn't be extending the voting registration, as suggested in the OP, but rather allowing ONLY those who registered as you said, and received the wrong ballot, to have a new ballot issued. That they want to extend the registration deadline has nothing to do with that.
Response to still_one (Reply #15)
Name removed Message auto-removed
liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)Play by the damn rules damn it!
PLAY BY THE RULES!!!
still_one
(98,883 posts)They pull this crap at the 11th hour
I hold back on the language I would like to use, because I will most likely be alerted on if I do
liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)They are thin skinned
still_one
(98,883 posts)and re-register. They have until Monday
Oh wait, it is the weekend, maybe they don't have 5 minutes to spare at their computer
liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)and it's creating an illusion of unfairness where none exists. I wish I could say I expected better of the Sanders campaign, but it is predictable now.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)Will someone please throw a chair?????!!!!!
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Like in NV?
marble falls
(71,780 posts)liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)Closed primaries are created to prevent a group from crashing the Parties Primary Election.
Join the damn party per the prescribed rules, if you can't do that, then you forfeit your right to vote in the "Parties Primary"
Rules are different for Primary Election than they are for the General. We went through this with the last primary that the BSers didn't think to register in the correct party until the last minute.
marble falls
(71,780 posts)liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)Either join the party or take what they offer in the fall.
And by join the party, I mean join by the rules, register by the prescribed date and anything else they require, even if you don't agree with it!
If you choose to remain an independent, then you still have made a choice.
Those are the rules!
marble falls
(71,780 posts)Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor, black, Latino or elderly.
Source: Washington Post
HOUSTON — In his wallet, Anthony Settles carries an expired Texas identification card, his Social Security card and an old student ID from the University of Houston, where he studied math and physics decades ago. What he does not have is the one thing that he needs to vote this presidential election: a current Texas photo ID.
For Settles to get one of those, his name has to match his birth certificate — and it doesn’t. In 1964, when he was 14, his mother married and changed his last name. After Texas passed a new voter-ID law, officials told Settles he had to show them his name-change certificate from 1964 to qualify for a new identification card to vote.
So with the help of several lawyers, Settles tried to find it, searching records in courthouses in the D.C. area, where he grew up. But they could not find it. To obtain a new document changing his name to the one he has used for 51 years, Settles has to go to court, a process that would cost him more than $250 — more than he is willing to pay.
“It has been a bureaucratic nightmare,” said Settles, 65, a retired engineer. “The intent of this law is to suppress the vote. I feel like I am not wanted in this state.”
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html
liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)How Does the Presidential Primary Process Work?
The Convention
Prior to a general election, there is a selection process to determine which candidate will appear on the ballot for a given political party in the nationwide general election. Political parties generally hold national conventions at which a group of delegates collectively decide upon which candidate they will run for the presidency. The process of choosing delegates to the national convention is undertaken at the state level, which means that there are significant differences from state to state and sometimes year to year. The two methods for choosing delegates to the national convention are the caucus and the primary.
The Caucus
Caucuses were the original method for selecting candidates but have decreased in number since the primary was introduced in the early 1900's. In states that hold caucuses a political party announces the date, time, and location of the meeting. Generally any voter registered with the party may attend. At the caucus, delegates are chosen to represent the state's interests at the national party convention. Prospective delegates are identified as favorable to a specific candidate or uncommitted. After discussion and debate an informal vote is taken to determine which delegates should be chosen.
The Primary
In the early twentieth century there was a movement to give more power to citizens in the selection of candidates for the party's nomination. The primary election developed from this reform movement. In a primary election, registered voters may participate in choosing the candidate for the party's nomination by voting through secret ballot, as in a general election.
There are two main types of primaries, closed or open, that determine who is eligible to vote in the primary. In a closed primary a registered voter may vote only in the election for the party with which that voter is affiliated. For example a voter registered as Democratic can vote only in the Democratic primary and a Republican can vote only in the Republican primary. In an open primary, on the other hand, a registered voter can vote in either primary regardless of party membership. The voter cannot, however, participate in more than one primary. A third less common type of primary, the blanket primary, allows registered voters to participate in all primaries.
In addition to differences in which voters are eligible to vote in the primary, there are differences in whether the ballot lists candidate or delegate names. The presidential preference primary is a direct vote for a specific candidate. The voter chooses the candidate by name. The second method is more indirect, giving the voter a choice among delegate names rather than candidate names. As in the caucus, delegates voice support for a particular candidate or remain uncommitted.
In some states a combination of the primary and caucus systems are used. The primary serves as a measure of public opinion but is not necessarily binding in choosing delegates. Sometimes the Party does not recognize open primaries because members of other parties are permitted to vote.
Awarding the Delegates
The Democratic Party always uses a proportional method for awarding delegates. The percentage of delegates each candidate is awarded (or the number of undecided delegates) is representative of the mood of the caucus-goers or the number of primary votes for the candidate. For example imagine a state with ten delegates and three candidates. If 60% of the people supported candidate X, 20% supported candidate Y, and 20% supported candidate Z, candidate X would receive six delegates and candidates Y and Z would each receive two delegates.
The Republican Party, unlike the Democratic Party, allows each state to decide whether to use the winner-take-all method or the proportional method. In the winner-take-all method the candidate whom the majority of caucus participants or voters support receives all the delegates for the state. It is essential to remember that this is a general guide and that the primary system differs significantly from state to state. The best way to find information about your state is to contact your state Board of Elections.
https://votesmart.org/education/presidential-primary#.V0RUeU3rvmE
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)What's with this inclusion stuff? Everyone knows the system is supposed to work like it's 1699. That's how it's always been.
Also, information is overrated. Everyone knows when it's time to vote. If they don't, then too bad for them. Go Nixon!
liberal N proud
(61,192 posts)Just join by the prescribed date! That's all you need to do!
So the game isn't going your way, so just change the rules so you can have more time?
Primaries are where the political parties select their candidates, they only want those who declare to be in their party to vote in their primary but they didn't say you couldn't be in the party, just join before the deadline.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)They are properly registered. It is clerical mistakes.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)beastie boy
(13,283 posts)It has finally dawned on them to sue before the fact rather than whine after the fact!
This is by no means a comment on the merits of their lawsuit, but at least they will have a judge telling them what to do with it, and they will not get an excuse to revert to their usual "rigged" routine. Not that it will necessarily stop them...
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)
Simple mistakes by employees not doing the job right. Not a voter problem. This info is right at the bottom of the OP.
beastie boy
(13,283 posts)fill in the name of your preferred candidate in the "wrong" ballot, while the "right" ballot lists them.
It appears that the unaffiliated potential Hillary voters have no problem writing in the name of their candidate. The parties to the lawsuit, that include a Bernie group, appear to have no confidence in their members accomplishing the task. I wonder what the judge will have to say about that.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)Honestly. Its like the high school drama club.
Vakero
(7 posts)American Independence Party is a conservative party. They are also plaintiffs. Why?
noneko
(33 posts)A woman in Cali was complaining that after she registered to vote and got her card in the mail it had her down as Republican. She's been a life long Democrat. Voter suppression is starting. I hope it won't be wide spread.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10206459702511461&set=gm.298840677131362&type=3&theater
Zorro
(18,628 posts)A substantial percentage of California voters send in their ballots by mail.
I think Sanders supporters are just setting the stage to claim that Clinton's impending win in California is not legitimate.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)noneko
(33 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)noneko
(33 posts)I was born and raised in Texas and went to college there. And trust me it's one of the worst states to live in. I know exactly what it's like to live in a red hell zone especially as a female.
You're right, California is very liberal. It's one of the states on the forefront of progress. But voter disenfranchisement can happen anywhere. Politicians are desperate and they'll do whatever it takes.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)Please don't misquote me. Much of San Diego and Orange Counties are conservative.
But, as a whole, the AZ state government is NOTHING like CA.
That's all I was saying. The 2 aren't comparable.
William769
(59,147 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)Instead they choose no party preference(NPP), and then according to the OP they requested a Democratic ballot, but they were sent the wrong ballot. So they want to sue to extend the voting registration.
All they have to do is go online a re-register as a Democrat, and do it before Monday.
Mark 750
(79 posts)but how about that Iraq vote thing?
COLGATE4
(14,886 posts)
Squinch
(59,383 posts)William769
(59,147 posts)Let's see if we can get some of these people to apologize for being so fucking stupid.
I'm talking now not 16 years ago.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)William769
(59,147 posts) Squinch
(59,383 posts) Maedhros
(10,007 posts)For one, you have not established credentials that make you an expert on California voting laws. For another, you provide no evidence for your assertion.
For some reason, I haven't put you on Ignore yet. Let me fix that right now.
William769
(59,147 posts) 
JudyM
(29,785 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And then along came Hillary...
Squinch
(59,383 posts)They still are.
No one is having any trouble with this but BS supporters.
Especially given that the solution to the problem is to log onto their computers and reregister as Democrats, which they can do till Monday.
But no one gets to throw any chairs that way so it isn't as much fun.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And not even trying to hide it.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)And they REALLY like drama and feeling like victims.
It's a lot of the reason why they lost the primary.
trudyco
(1,258 posts)
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)Some of the comments in this thread remind me of the comments made by Republicans in the 2000 election.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Rules dont apply to Bernie Kids
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Americans have the right to vote. Period. Time limits on when you can register are silly. Let Democracy rule, its the very fabric of this nation.
DustyJoe
(849 posts)If you can register to vote at the precinct as they hand you a ballot, they should do away with the schedule used for candidates to declare their candidacy for those ballots. Ballots could just have blanks by the office name and all candidates could just be written in at time of voting. Eliminates dropped names on the ballot. Would make for interesting campaigning as a new candidate pops up on TV on voting day. <this entire post is tongue in cheek for anyone thinking it's serious>
still_one
(98,883 posts)solved. They have until Monday to do this
The OP said they registered as NPP, and then requested the Democratic ballot, and some received the wrong ballot. All they have to do is re-register as a Democrat.
If instead they want to proceed through the legal system by suing, hoping they get a court date, and then a judgement in their favor that's their choice. There is a simple way to get around it. Re-register as a Democrat now
Squinch
(59,383 posts)
RandySF
(83,757 posts)Last edited Sun May 22, 2016, 09:25 PM - Edit history (1)
And start looking for things like voter registration deadlines.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)But how to reach all the people who need a cross-over ballot in time?
they need to remail the information that was mailed out wrong with wrong deadline dates and with wrong information on which ballot to use. They even trained people wrong who were supposed to help when people come to the precinct to vote.
Response to ThinkCritically (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Sander's should have known what the rules were -state by state when he decided to jump in.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)See my post above #106
Here, I'll make it easy for you.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1460350
Omaha Steve
(109,081 posts)She kept her name on the ballots in two states even though the DNC told her to do it. Obama took his name off like he was asked and got hosed.
http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2008/june/clinton_candidacy/hillary_timeline_09.html
May 31, 2008 The Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee decides to give only half-votes to delegates from Michigan and Florida. Both states held unsanctioned primaries, which Clinton won. The move dashes Clinton's hope that a rule change would help her close the delegate gap with Obama
http://www.seacoastonline.com/article/20080529/Opinion/805290418
The tight primary fight between Obama and Clinton is the reason why this has become a radioactive issue. Despite public statements to the contrary last year and now that Obama is on the verge of clinching the Democratic presidential nomination, Clinton has insisted on counting the beauty contest votes as legitimate and seating the delegations according to those votes.
While claiming to speak for the disenfranchised voters in Florida and Michigan — and while counting these votes into her overall popular vote total to make the case for her nomination — Clinton often fails to note the obvious: These major rule changes as the contest nears the end would benefit her and her alone.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Trying to find votes anywhere he can.
Squinch
(59,383 posts) 
NNadir
(37,926 posts)...but just couldn't do so because, well, they just couldn't. Therefore he should sue to keep the polls open until he wins, because he knows he's going to win, because he has to, because he's Bernie Sanders and he speaks for everyone because well, because he says he does.
Squinch
(59,383 posts)them up and dressed them and brushed their teeth and then drove them to the voting place and did hand-over-hand with the pen on the ballot, then BS would DEFINITELY have won. And for registering, why did no one come to my house on the registration deadline date? Huh? How is THAT fair?????
Anything less is a conspiracy, I tell you!!!!!
NNadir
(37,926 posts)...polling place where the machine will have the choice of voting for Bernie Sanders or Bernie Sanders, because it would be unfair if anyone thought it wise to not vote for Bernie Sanders. He speaks for everyone and he knows that everyone is positive that they want to vote for Bernie Sanders. If any other name is put on the ballot, therefore, it's a fixed election!
Squinch
(59,383 posts)would not disenfranchise me.
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)BUT if young and newer voters were on HRC's side rather than the reverse, you can bet they'd be rallying/chanting with huge signs and tossing out lawsuits to have registration extended until the day AFTER the primary LOLz
being-transparent was never one of their more flattering looks
TomCADem
(17,837 posts)Why not the ACLU or some other more typical voting rights practitioner? He could be pretty good, but does not strike as a typical voting rights guy. Oh well, maybe Bill is some former Supreme Court clerk who went to a top law school who can learn it on the fly.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)This info comes from a Bernie site for this lawsuit:
1. A "declaratory judgment" essentially saying that the defendants violated the law regarding their obligation to provide voting rights notices required by statute.
2. Wide distribution of this information via radio, TV, newspaper, internet social media platforms in Alameda County and throughout the state of California;
3. Ensuring that sufficient ballot forms for all of the Presidential primary candidates are at all of the polling places on June 7;
4. That no party preference voters are not refused a Presidential primary ballot if they personally appear at their proper polling place;
5. Changing the applications at the Board of Elections websites in Alameda County, San Francisco, and throughout the state of California to conform with the essential terms set forth in the uniform application created by the Secretary of State;
6. An order permitting the write-in of the Democratic, American Independent Party, and Libertarian candidates, or, in the alternative, segregation of the ballots that have already been cast by those with no party preference registration in order to permit voters to re-vote for the candidate of their choice by June 7;
7. An order extending the registration deadline to June 7, in order to ensure that no party preference voters are properly informed of the option to either re-register with a party or request a Democratic, American Independent Party or Libertarian Party Presidential primary ballot;
8. An order, as well, stating that party voters must be properly informed of the option to re-register as no party preference and request a Democratic, American Independent Party or Libertarian Party Presidential primary ballot if that is their preference;
9. An order that provisional ballots will not be issued to voters unless there is no other alternative.
I know a lot of you are saying they should just re register and all is well. It's way too late for that and most of them don't even know they got wrong information or what to do about it. They need time to be informed of what happened. By the time they find out, it will be too late to change registration. At the very least they need correct instructions on how to fix this problem by June 7.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)people eligible to and interested in voting can do so without impediment.
Voter suppression measures have taken many many more folks off the rolls than the number of folks who have committed "election fraud," which is usually the Pukes' smarmy bullshit rationalization for such suppression measures.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Everyone else seems capable of doing it.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I remember her rationale and some Clintonites here are denying she ever said such a thing, labeling anyone who repeats it a dreaded conspiracy theorist and banning people from their groups. She said she should stay in the race through June in 2008 because and I quote,"Remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June 1968." Can you believe that. What was she implying. If Sanders said that he would be ripped to pieces and rightfully so. Also, they claim Sanders never marched or sat with MLK...Ive seen photos where it looks exactly like him but so do a lot of people...any fact checking???
Squinch
(59,383 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Democracy in action will be very fun for you.
George II
(67,782 posts)
Before you know it they'll sue to change the rules so voters can only vote for Sanders.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Squinch
(59,383 posts)
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Brother Joe Observes
(61 posts)If only I could think of his name! Ronald Rump, maybe?
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)3hummingbirds
(58 posts)I worked the polls in my county in California several times, and same day registration was always done. What's the big deal?
Squinch
(59,383 posts)Retrograde
(11,416 posts)Gothmog
(179,195 posts)Sanders lost this lawsuit also http://www.ocregister.com/articles/primary-717076-hearing-voters.html
Attorney William Simpich argued in the filing that the process for unaffiliated voters to get a presidential primary ballot – particularly those seeking to cast ballots in the Democratic primary contest between Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – was too confusing and would leave many voters disenfranchised. He said at least two counties failed to notify some voters of their right to request a ballot to vote in the Democratic, Libertarian or American Independent Party contests.
“Thousands of Californians are in imminent danger of being disenfranchised in the 2016 presidential primary election ending on June 7, 2016, and will continue to be shut out of the democratic process unless and until defendants reform their voting by mail practices, Simpich wrote in the filing on behalf of two voters, a group called the Voting Rights Defense Project and the American Independent Party.
Simpich had asked the court to extend the registration deadline to election day, but the response from U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup on Tuesday means the case will not be addressed by then.
Gothmog
(179,195 posts)Yeah http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/1/judge-rejects-bernie-sanders-supporters-voting-law/
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A federal judge has rejected a lawsuit by a Bernie Sanders supporter who argued elections officials in California were robbing unaffiliated voters of the chance to vote in the state’s June 7 Democratic presidential primary.
U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup in San Francisco said Wednesday the Voting Rights Defense Project waited too long to request an injunction for radio and TV ads informing unaffiliated voters that they can vote in the presidential primary of the Democratic, American Independent and Libertarian parties.
The group had argued that county elections officials were failing to inform unaffiliated voters of that right, threatening to disenfranchise thousands of voters. Its lawsuit named California Secretary of State Alex Padilla and two county elections officials.
Padilla said the lawsuit was frivolous.