Hi, everybody. I'm a disenfranchised voter.

[F4lconF16]

My name is F4lconF16, I'm a politically aware, involved, and working-class citizen, and I will not be able to participate in the primaries because I have been disenfranchised.

I live in Washington, where we have open caucuses. I checked my voter registration two weeks ago to make sure my information was correct and settled in to wait for this weekend. The caucuses will be held on Saturday, March 26th, 2016, at 10 am. I know my caucus location and know my route and schedule to get there. I planned on getting there early to help out with anybody confused by the process.

Washington has a process by which you can cast a surrogate vote in case you cannot attend the caucuses because of work, religion, or other reasons. All you have to do is fill out a form by a certain date and submit it.

My work schedule changed two days ago. My boss was not able to find someone to cover the weekend shift. She'll be headed to SakuraCon, a pretty cool sounding anime convention I would have been attending with my roommate if she payed me decently. Turns out I'll be working the Saturday shift, which is cool with me--I can't turn down hours, I'm too damn poor.

The date by which I had to send in my form was March 18th. I can't cast a surrogate vote. I can't go to the caucus. I can't participate in the political process in an absolutely crucial election.

I have been disenfranchised, like many others will be.

The Democratic Party can take my vote and shove it. They won't have my vote in November. They're nakedly anti-democratic, and currently and historically have been against almost everything I stand for. I'm done.

Say goodbye to another millenial.

[Punkingal]

1. Well screw that!

What is the point of a surrogate if not to cover last minute emergencies like that?

[Art_from_Ark]

10. +1

[daleanime]

110. Hell yes....

[beam me up scottie]

2. Welcome back!

[F4lconF16]

30. Forgot to say hi!

Been avoiding DU for the most part. Lost interest a while back. How's the clusterf--- going around here?

Jpr sounds good, need more time to really get to know it though, and too busy with my life and education right now.

[XRubicon]

3. Goodbye another millenial

[kerry-is-my-prez]

50. In Fl, I see 80-90 yr olds with walkers and oxygen tanks standing in line in 90 degree weather.

Shameful how a kid is so dismissive of voting and the Dem Party. There's no excuse for your state/county to be so messed up (let me guess, you don't live in an affluent area - that's where they do this stuff).

[lunamagica]

54. +1.

[Fairgo]

63. Why are 90 year old citizens forced to stand in the 90 degree heat?

Yikes! That's life threatening.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

67. They often insist on voting in person in early voting. They could do absentee voting which is

encouraged. They are the same people who insist upon taking the bus during rush hour to get to the dept. store at opening time. They would rather be on a squashed bus than wait an hour to take a bus during non-rush hour. I did see a bunch of them standing out in the hot sun with their walkers to protest Dick Cheney too so they are a mixed blessing......

[Fairgo]

68. Gotta love 'em

Old rascals...I aspire to be one, one day.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

72. My dad would run around with a sweater complaining about how cold it was when it was 79 out.

"It's too damn cold," was his favorite phrase. Us middle aged only do that when it's below 65!

[daleanime]

111. Did you even read the OP....

this is some one who desperately wants to be involved, but can't because of work. They have every right to be upset about being shut out.

[Gregorian]

4. Welcome to the 18th century.

you might as well laugh. You know the ending of the Sierra Madre film. fuck

[Jenny_92808]

41. Sierra Madre film

Sierra Madre ending

I agree, you might as well laugh.

[bravenak]

5. Caucuses are fucked up

I have mine on Sat and it will be exhausing. I would not be able to go if I did not have somebody to watch my kids. We need to end the Caucus.

[still_one]

6. Not only that, but most caucuses don't allow for absentee ballots, which discriminates against

people who cannot attend in person

Of course the OP chooses to blame Democrats for not being able to vote, when the fact is it is up to the State whether it has a primary or a caucus, but I guess people need to blame something:


http://www.diffen.com/difference/Caucus_vs_Primary

The other problem with a caucus is your vote is not necessarily secret, and that is wrong also

[bravenak]

8. That too. People feel pressured to switch their support.

They need to pressure the State, I hope they stop this slander.

[still_one]

9. I agree with you

[F4lconF16]

14. Blaming the oldest political party in the US

For something it could have changed many years ago, and continues to ignore (or worse, actively work against)? The state parties are not immune to the criticism of the national party. Indeed, having the states decide how people vote seems like a recipe for trouble.

I don't know, it seems reasonable to me. You don't keep blatantly undemocratic processes (see: superdelegates) in your elections unless you intend to quash democracy. The Democratic Party has a bit of a history of party machinations in that regard.

Today, I have been disenfranchised. I'll be able to vote again, and it won't be a big deal. It pissed me off enough to swear off of them for the next couple years, at least, but I could get over that. Maybe.

What truly bothers me is the millions that have been permanently relgated to invisibility because of the Democratic Party. It has supported, over the years, both officially and unofficially, mass incarceration, various forms of voter suppression, and other attacks on the working class. It's in their interests (and my own, as an lgbt individual and impoverished worker) to stop supporting a party that refuses to take any meaningful action to help the oppressed besides being forced to make a couple concessions every so often. This system is utterly broken. It can't be fixed. We need to move past it.

[bravenak]

16. You have to join a party to change it.

[F4lconF16]

26. I want it gone, or at least moved out of the way of progress.

I don't have the time to futz around pretending we can appease the interests of capital while liberating the oppressed.

Climate change is about to completely demolish this society. I'd prefer to do something about that beforehand, so we can at least slow the acceleration. The Democratic Party--seen right now under the Obama administration's "all of the above" energy policy, among other things--wants none of that.

I keep trying to convince myself to vote for them to prevent worse from happening...but they are rebutting me at every turn. They don't want me, and I'm finally beginning to accept that. Should have a long time ago, if I'm being honest. I know its history well enough.

[bravenak]

31. That is not how the world works

I wanted that too. But the party protects me from republicans. I do not have the privilege of tearing shit down and starting over. It would put me a severe risk of harm and my children too. I am female and black. This party is all that stands between me and a return to Jim Crow and back alley abortions.

[Gregorian]

36. Thank you for that perspective.

I like the idea of the party protecting us from republicans. That's an interesting way of looking at it.

[bravenak]

37. I had to open my eyes. I see it now.

[F4lconF16]

40. I guess the radical black women I have spoken to here disagree.

They're not huge fans. The free verse rapper on the bus seemed pretty pissed about the party, too. He was black. Sawant is currently unable to do shit for the homeless or POC in Seattle because the Democrats will vote against anything she brings to the table, and I had a badass black teacher talk to me about that recently. Might just be the crowd I hang with, though.

We'll do what we think is right. I think that's a good thing.

[bravenak]

46. Probably younger than me

I said I had thought that too. You learn how bad the other side is after a few cycles following the politics closely. You need a group to get shit done. Being all extra special and super pure and no compromise gets us jack shit instead of something less than we want.
I used to seriously think I could get what I wanted by fighting the powers and being self righteous. I realized that I needed a much bigger group. This party changed from being the Jim Crow party to protecting the voting rights of blacks. It took to long. But it took. Because old black folks had a long view and patience. And no choice. This nation was DESIGNED to work slow. When repubs are in we LOVE that, if not we hate it.
If the far left wants to win, they'd need a bigger tent or a big damn dose of compromise. Not many are to my left in this nation. Accepting that allows me to vote strategically. I vote against people, more than for them most times.

[F4lconF16]

42. Oh, and how is building a true alternative to the predatory

Racist, misogynist, anti-gay capitalist society we live in "tearing shit down"?

Might want to read some anarchist texts someday.

[bravenak]

48. Because it would cause a war, which is indiscriminate in what it tears down

80 percent of the nation is not interested in a far left utopia. It would be moderates and righties against the far left if they decided to ignore the rest of the nation and just start remaking shit in their own image. They are not like you. Your utopia is their dystopia. And they will fight. And they are way more dangerous.

[F4lconF16]

53. I think there are many who have not realized an alternative.

This is why I focus on education.

Thank you for your perspective as usual. I will reflect on it.

[bravenak]

56. Education is the best thing

One at a time. All that can really be done.

[still_one]

34. ok

[kerry-is-my-prez]

62. It's the Republican Party who denied/fought against climate change and a Democrat who fought for

fixing it. Remember Al Gore? Bush (a Republican) got into office partly due to a Green Party candidate.

[hellofromreddit]

25. It makes sense to blame the parties

Of course the OP chooses to blame Democrats for not being able to vote, when the fact is it is up to the State whether it has a primary or a caucus, but I guess people need to blame something:

Political parties put themselves in between the public and the government. They like the credit when the facilitate the connection, but they like to disown their positions when they're accused of being in the way.

Can't have it both ways.

[strategery blunder]

83. We in WA state tried to change to primaries years ago through ballot initiative

The WA state Democratic Party sued to overturn the results of the ballot initiative and keep the caucuses.

Sadly.

We're kinda the exception of the rule here. It should be up to the state (or, where the state allows, its voters) whether to hold a caucus or a primary, but in this case the party apparatus sued to overturn that. Sickening.

Crap like this is why I put in for vacation time on Saturday months ago. I burned eight hours of it just to be safe from these kinds of last minute schedule changes at work. And cashiers who have access to vacation time (like me) are rare.

Does the Democratic Party want to encourage and invite new members, or remain insular to the party apparatchiks who have already "paid their dues?" To me, that's what this primary is all about.

[F4lconF16]

88. Thank you for adding this.

I should have put it in here.

[strategery blunder]

98. Ofc the "blame the voter for not planning ahead" types didn't reply to the new info

how typical.

[CoffeeCat]

101. The Republicans in my state handle their caucus a bit differently

They arrive in person at the caucus, and they fill out a piece of paper with their candidate's name written on the paper. It's not even a ballot. It's a plain piece of paper.

The caucus goers file up to the front of the room and put their folded ballot in the box.

When everyone has voted, the "ballots" are read aloud and counted with everyone in the room watching.

I like this idea. It's kind of a hybrid caucus/election situation--with no electronic voting machines.

Also, they don't pick delegates. It's just a straight up vote.

In my state, the Dems do it so differently. Of course we do the standard caucus. Check in. The check in numbers determine the first count. Then we divide into groups, then we reallign and then a final count is taken. Then, we select delegates. Then the delegates selected go to County Convention. At County Convention we elect district/state delegates. Then at district/state we elect our national delegates.

Yep. I like the Republican method better.

[F4lconF16]

15. Agreed. Hope you survive. Nt

[bravenak]

17. I will. They need me there.nt

[still_one]

7. You do realize it was YOUR state that set up the caucus over the primary. Whose fault is that?

[wyldwolf]

18. It must be debbie wasserman schultz's or Hillary's. Maybe even the DLC.

[still_one]

28. of course, why not. It is either the DNC's chair's fault, or President Obama's. I don't think

there are any other choices are there?



I don't really have to put the sarcasm tag do I?

oh, alright...........

[kerry-is-my-prez]

64. May I suggest the OP take a course in Logic? There is a lot of illogical thinking going on there....

it but appears that you have a habit of emotional reasoning. Also before try to assess blame for something, try to figure out the real cause. And then to whip up fervor perhaps encouraging others to do the same is just not responsible. Sorry for you being dis-enfranchised though.....

[jeff47]

103. Actually, HIS state voted to have primaries. The WA Democratic party sued to stop them. (nt)

[sadoldgirl]

11. Welcome back, and

yes, that stinks!

[BernieforPres2016]

12. It's time to do away with caucuses

Last edited Thu Mar 24, 2016, 08:35 PM - Edit history (1)

People who are young are much less likely to be able to spend hours at a caucus to cast their ballot than are older folks who are more likely to work 8-5 with weekends off or to be retired with plenty of time on their hands (and I speak as one of the latter). In addition, I believe in secret ballots. People shouldn't have to listen to people make arguments for various candidates if they've done their research and know who they're voting for, nor should they be subjected to external pressure.

F4IconF16, I am sorry this happened to you and applaud you for not attaching to either of these corrupt corporatist parties.

[Dem2]

13. The more I hear about caucuses, the more un-democratic they sound

So glad my state doesn't have that ancient process in place - it just doesn't work in today's fast-moving society.

[Tarc]

19. Well I'm sorry you can't vote, but...

your state at least holds their vote on a Saturday, which is accommodating and convenient to the majority of voters there, as it is not on a weekday/night. No system will be 100% perfect, nor can contingencies be created for each and every possible scenario of every single voter.

It sucks, but, this is no one's fault...not Bernie's not Hillary's, not even the state party leaders. Sometimes things are just unavoidable.

[JonLeibowitz]

102. It's not very accommodating to the working class. Of course, the party has been trying to push them

out of the party for a while now so this is a desired outcome.

[Tarc]

113. Well, holding it on a Saturday works for the 9-5 weekday workers

But it isn't going to cover everyone. This guy got pinched by a last minute call-in by a jerk of a boss, by the sounds of the story.

Washington voters should push their reps to loosen the absentee ballot rules.

[dana_b]

20. what a bunch of crap. I'm sorry that

their system is so archaic and shitty.

Disenfranchise people and expect them to give a damn in 7 months from now? Pfffttt....

[MineralMan]

21. No, you're not disenfranchised.

You are not able to vote due to your job. Not the same thing at all. I'm very sorry that you can't get to your caucus, but that's not disenfranchisement.

[Agschmid]

22. And this is why caucuses suck.

[goldent]

23. I don't think I would ever go to a party caucus.

The pain would not be worth it.

[BainsBane]

24. Election law is determined by the state legislature, not the party

Caucuses are a problem because they severely limit participation, not only for people who have to work but also the elderly, sick, and disabled. In my state, an employer has to let you off to caucus, but they don't have to pay you.

On the positive note for people here, that limited participation that characterizes the caucus system is precisely what favors their chosen candidate, whose strategy explicitly targets caucuses.

[F4lconF16]

32. True, but the party hasn't exactly shown an interest in changing it.

Curious about your last statement? Care to expand?

[BainsBane]

49. In Jan, Devine said there were specifically targeting caucuses

The idea is to take advantage of the caucus format, which tends to reward campaigns with the most dedicated partisans. The caucuses play to Sanders’ strength in another important way – they are largely held in states that are heavily white, which helps Sanders neutralize Clinton’s edge with minority voters.
With a dozen such contests coming before the end of March – and Clinton expected to perform well on March 1, the first big multi-state primary day -- the caucuses are emerging as an integral part of Sanders’ long-shot plan.
“Caucuses are very good for Bernie Sanders,” explained chief Sanders strategist Tad Devine, likening the 2016 strategy to the one he deployed as Mike Dukakis’ field director in 1988. “Caucuses tend to be in the much-lower turnout universe, and having people who intensely support you in events like that makes a huge difference. You saw that with President Obama in 2008, and you’re going to see it with Bernie Sanders."


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/bernie-sanders-iowa-obama-playbook-218137#ixzz43s6fZ8LP
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

That strategy has borne fruit. Sanders has managed to win the caucus states, with the exception of Nevada. The difference there is the diverse electorate that participates in the caucuses. Nevada also seems to make it easier to caucus then some states like Utah.

[F4lconF16]

87. Thank you. Did not realize this. Nt

[strategery blunder]

84. In WA state, the state Democratic Party sued to keep caucuses when the state tried primaries

Voters passed an initiative to go to a primary system, as allowed by state law.

The state Democratic Party sued to keep the caucuses.

And that's where we are now...the party won in court at the expense of voter access.

Technically we have both a caucus and a "top 2 primary" because of this...the delegates are awarded at the caucus (which is what the party sued to keep) and a (largely symbolic) primary where all candidates appear on the same ballot, and the top 2 vote earners appear on the state's November ballot.

OP left out that bit of context, which is important for those who do not live in WA to understand why OP would be upset specifically at the Democratic Party.

[Onlooker]

27. You'll show them!

Yeah, teach those blacks, gays, Muslims, Latinos, and women a lesson by standing up for your voting rights. Go ahead, you're rights were hurt, so might as well stand by while a fascist gets elected who can hurt the voting rights of everyone else. Goodbye, selfish. I predict you'll be a Republican someday, if not already.

[F4lconF16]

35. Yeah, fuck my trans roommate! Screw my genderqueer pansexual self!

Wait a minute...

I'm sure Ms. "Reagan loved the aids people" will be right by my side when my rights are trampled. Yup.

Damn, and I said I wouldn't respond to these comments. Too bored, wish I hadn't missed the bus. Trump will definitely fix our public transportation system for sure. I think I'll vote for him...

[Onlooker]

47. You're millennial. You probably weren't even alive back then.

I wonder how much you know about the struggle for gay rights. In the 60s, much of the left cited gays as proof of capitalist decadence and the Black Panthers were fiercely homophobic (except perhaps Bobby Seal). In the 70s, gays were regularly labeled pedophiles, and though the gay rights movement was rising up, so was the rise of the religious right and the right wing. In the 80s, Reagan sat by while tens of thousands of gays were dying of AIDS, and the gay rights movement was too consumed with tragedy to fight back effectively (though in cities they tried). In the 90s, Bill Clinton actively sought out gay support, formally met with gays in the White House, appointed scores of openly gay people, pushed nondiscrimination laws, and tried really hard to push back against the right wing, but he lost badly. DOMA was passed by veto proof majorities at a time when state after state were amending their constitutions to define marriage as straight. But, the 90s were when the gay rights movement was able to really blossom thanks to the climate created by the Clintons. Yeah, Hillary said something stupid about Nancy Reagan, but probably because Nancy's liberal gay son claimed that she lobbied her husband. Yeah, your genderqueer self has not had to struggle much, and the gay rights movement owes the Clintons a lot for fighting for gay rights in the wake of Reagan when the right wing was powerful enough to control large swaths of the Democratic Party when it came to gay rights. The Clintons were vocal supporters of gay rights relative to their times. The fact is that Bernie Sanders opposed DOMA for the same reason he opposed the Brady Bill -- as a matter of states rights, and Bernie was gutsy enough to support gay rights in one of the most liberal cities in one of the most liberal states. But, yeah, Donald Trump will do a lot more for your trans roommate, and your genderqueer self is unlikely to run into much difficulty anyway unless you express that in a gay or trans way.

[F4lconF16]

52. I wasn't. I've spoken to many who were.

They were all pretty clear: the Clintons were not on their side. From the history I have read, they were not anti-gay, but they did not want to push the boundaries much. I do not care much about Sanders record on gay rights; it mirrors that of his support for anti-racist policies: good, but not enough, and nowhere near as loudly as it should have been and still needs to be. You assume I support him, and you shouldn't. Lastly, I am well aware of the struggles of the gay movement; I finished the second book in the last month on it, and recently wrote a personal reflection on the treatment of women and LGBT people by the black panthers. I know the pain of their struggles, if not personally, and for that reason I work towards a revolution like that of Russia in 1917, where in a few short years the rights of trans people were recognized beyond any other society of the time.

Can't say I probably will run into much difficulty. Being a white male is a big help in life, and I'm lucky to have only had to deal with a few threats and shouted slurs. But I care about the people by my side who have run into such difficulty. I will struggle for them, get beaten in defense for them (and very nearly have on more than one occasion), and do whatever it takes to secure them from the narcissistic sociopaths of the world like Trump and the criminally ignorant that follow him.

Thank you for a more genuine response. It is helpful if you don't attack a person with the standard "you selfish Republican" first.

[Onlooker]

58. The Clintons were very pro-gay ...

... in a very anti-gay era, and that's why they have so much good will in the gay community and with many gay organizations. Thebacklash to the Clinton's pro-gay agenda was enormous, and they found themselves fending off both the Democrats and the Republicans. Blaming them for the setbacks on gay rights during their tenure would be like blaming Obama for the current backlash against gay rights taking place in many states, most recently Georgia and North Carolina. As far as a revolution goes, it's really problematic. I think if Trump wasn't running, Sanders would easily win the Democratic nomination, but Trump appeals more than Sanders to the white working class, so at this time a revolution is more likely to come from the right than the left.

[Lizzie Poppet]

93. That's one for your Ignore list.

That first shitty remark made to you would earn the person who blurted it in my presence a nice face full of spit.

[Lizzie Poppet]

91. Wow...what a completely fucked-up, assholish thing to say.

Low, even for one of Princess Weathervane's Ostrich Army...

[blm]

29. If it was a primary instead of a caucus which your state preferred, you'd have voted

early by now.

[upaloopa]

33. I am sorry you can't caucus

Change happens by people who stay involved

[George II]

38. Do you realize that it isn't the Democratic Party that establishes the way the caucus is conducted?

That is established by the state legislature.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

59. They just said on MSNBC a COUNTY supervisor took responsibility. Why would you turn against

a NATIONAL political party? Are you a Democrat? Posts like this end up helping the Green Party and even the Republican Party.

[jeff47]

104. In this case, it is. The WA Democratic party sued to keep caucuses

after a ballot initiative that switched the state to primaries passed.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. The whole country should be on automatic vote by mail, as Oregon is

And the primaries should either be all on one day or else held over a series of weeks on a rotating order basis- the states that went first this time go last in 4 years, etc.

Caucuses are a waste of time and a relic, should be replaced by a direct vote.

[F4lconF16]

43. I'm happy I can do that normally.

This is strictly a primary thing.

[Jenny_92808]

45. I couldn't agree with you more.

When Bernie becomes President, I wonder if he could do an executive order requiring all FEDERAL elections to be 'vote by mail.'

[jello]

81. yep

I am an Oregonian and proud of our vote-by-mail system. It's so easy, you take your time, and you don't stand in line (for hours). You just need a stamp to mail it or you walk or drive it to drop box or county office. It's a NO-BRAINER!!

[Lizzie Poppet]

94. The sooner the better.

FFS, (most of) the rest of the country...get on our level!

[Warren DeMontague]

95. Indeed.

[tritsofme]

44. Caucuses are an undemocratic disgrace.

They need to be completely eliminated from our nomination process, and have no place in our party.

[dlwickham]

51. so you're blaming the party for what your boss did?

[Agnosticsherbet]

55. Your boss is a Jackass who doesn't pay you enough to go to SakuraCon, and assigns work at the last

minute.
Was your boss a Democrat?

[F4lconF16]

57. Eh, I wouldn't call her a jackass.

Schedules changed and we're a tiny shop, it is somewhat expected.

Voting and passionate for Sanders, though.

[Agnosticsherbet]

60. I have issues with caucus systems.

They appear tailor made to encourage low turnout. i would like to see them disappear, but each state has the Constitutional power to set how its elections are run.
I am not sure why its the fault of the Democratic Party of Washington State.

And between the comments on your lack of a decent wage and being called to work at the last minute, I seemed to have made a judgement that was incorrect.

I like the way California changed our primary system. If things go as the look, it appears that we will have a choice of one Democrat or another for the US Senate Seat.

[RedCappedBandit]

61. Caucuses suck.

I say this as a Bernie support who understands that he has fared better in states WITH caucuses.

They're simply anti-democratic.

[MADem]

65. It's not the party's fault. It's your boss's fault.

The boss should give you the day off, and find someone else to cover you, or close up while you do your civic duty.

See why caucusing sucks?

Primaries are much better.

[jeff47]

105. In this case, it is the party's fault.

The WA Democratic party sued to keep the caucus system after a ballot initiative to switch to primaries passed.

[MADem]

108. Well, that's the state arm, not the DNC.

I'm not familiar with the lawsuit so I can't really rebut.

Did they sue to keep it forever, or were they just unprepared to do it this cycle?

[jeff47]

109. The DNC might have a wee bit of influence on the state party.

As for the suit, I don't know the details. Just that the state party fought to keep caucuses, despite the fact that WA is holding a primary anyway.

[MADem]

112. I know that the federal government can't touch the states with a ten foot pole, absent

systematic disenfranchisement (like poll taxes or tests). I think there might be some trouble if people not from the state try to tell the state how to run their business.

I'm no expert on election law, I admit that completely--but I do know that states have the final say in how they run an election (badly, in the case of Bush v. Gore FL, e.g.).

If the state judiciary ruled that they want to do it one way as opposed to another, I would guess that the logic is found in the ruling.

[SheilaT]

66. I'm sorry you will be unable to attend the caucus.

But what if your state had a one day only primary, and you got assigned to work 7am to 7pm and therefore couldn't make it to the polling place? Would you likewise be yelling about being disenfranchised and refuse to vote in November?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

70. Turn on MSNBC - interview w/the person responsible for the voting mess. A county employee.

[SheilaT]

73. I'm big on lots of early voting,

which would preclude a caucus unless caucus states institute a system of absentee ballots. I also think there should either be automatic registration, or same day registration.


The nonsense about people's party affiliations being changed in Arizona, and I'm now seeing reports of the same from California: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280156839

Maybe the states that don't have registration by party are on to something, although then all primaries are open primaries, which some people like and some people don't.

And yes, county or state employees are often at the heart of these issues.

[jillan]

69. I am so sorry this happened to you. Please don't listen to the rude comments in this thread.

Emotions are high right now

Don't give up. My daughter is also a millennial. It took her a couple of election cycles to realize how important it is to vote.
I know you feel frustrated right now, and I don't blame you.
We need you to be an active voter. Prepare for November ahead of time, so you can vote against Trump cuz that is the most important thing.

Your voice matters, don't give up.

[F4lconF16]

75. Don't worry.

I will be voting, just perhaps not for a Democrat. And not Trump, too. I will remain highly active in my local area. I like building movements, and widely inclusive ones at that. It remains a challenge to convince people to care about problems other than theirs, but that is half the fun. I am glad my job brings me into contact with hundreds of different people a week, as it helps to define my own thoughts and listen to new perspectives.

As for rude comments here...eh. It's the internet. I take what is helpful, and ignore the rest. Perhaps it's a normal thing for people my age to do, but my friends and brother and I rarely read everything we see. We pick what we like and ignore the rest; if we didn't, there would be a total overload of information. We get quite good at figuring out what is useful and what is not.

I'll not give them the satisfaction of watching me give up. thanks for your encouragement, the kind things are nice to hear.

[jillan]

79. So happy to hear you will stay involved :)

[OhZone]

71. #thanksobama

I mean #thanks-hillary

BTW, it will all be over by the time they get to NJ. Always is. Think how I feel!

Actually it's all over already really.

Oh well.

[jello]

82. And then there's the left coast states

Oregon votes in mid-May and Cali in JUNE!! I think we should just have a national primary on one day.

[LostOne4Ever]

74. Let me echo BMUS and say Welcome back!

This place isn't the same without my favorite radical!

And technically I am Generation Catalano as I was born in the early 80's so that lets me get to claim to be a part of Gen X and Millenials both

[hr]

That said, the fact that our political system has screwed you over is just another indictment of all that is wrong with the way we vote in this country. Our whole system is one giant clusterfuck.

Campaigns that never end that feed into the astronomical cost of running for office forcing politicians to sell out all principles to corporations and the rich for funds.

The reliance on a system designed for an america from 200 years ago in which citizens in small states votes count almost 2-3x as much as those in large states and those voters living in states.

The use of a system that makes voting for dems in red states, or for third parties wasted votes.

We need to completely change the way we vote in this country. But that would require a government that is responsible to the people...something neither party in power seems interested in.

[F4lconF16]

90. Hello!

Good to see you again.

I agree that we need to change much more. That is one thing I have a very hard time communicating to most people--we are raised from birth in this country to respect the authority of the current system.

[Warren DeMontague]

96. Yeah, I think to really be Gen X you have to remember the time before microwaves and VCRs.

We used to have one of those tvs with a remote that had the tuning fork in it. How's that for old school.

[LostOne4Ever]

97. Does Beta Max count as before VCRs? nt

[jeff47]

106. No, Beta was one of the competing formats for VCR tapes.

Sony wouldn't let porn use Beta. So VHS became the standard.

Your Beta machine was a VCR.

[fun n serious]

76. How is that the fault of the Democratic party LOL

[jeff47]

107. Because the state party sued to keep caucuses

after a ballot initiative changed the state to primaries.

[RandySF]

77. This is why I hate caucuses.

[Juicy_Bellows]

78. Welcome back -

If your boss is a Sanders fan how is she planning on voting if she will be at a convention? How about a lunch break or 'closed to vote sign' ?

I'm sure you've thought of this already - sucks but maybe there is a way?

[jello]

80. I hear you

Absolutely unacceptable. I wonder what the reason is that you can't drop off a surrogate vote up to day before caucus. And btw, talking about disenfranchisement...did you see those long lines in AZ, CNN calling the results after only 1% of the vote was in while thousands still in long lines...and did you see any disabled or elderly people in those lines (NO!!).

[Skid Rogue]

85. F4lconF16, that's really too bad.

However, I think Washington State law requires an employer to give you 2 paid hours of leave to vote.

Employees who do not have 2 free hours (excluding meals and breaks) during their work day in which polls are open, and who receive their work schedule with insufficient time to request an absentee ballot, are entitled to up to 2 paid hours leave to vote. The employer can set the time for leave to vote.

I understand running a small business in hard and no one wants to be a troublemaker on the job, but maybe you should say something to your boss. Clinton folks are always advising Sanders' supporters to "start local." You can't get any more local than the place you work.

Also, if voting is so important to you, eat peanut butter sandwiches for a week. I'm not being a smart ass. I've had to sacrifice in order to participate in elections.

No matter what, I hope you find a way to work this out. Let us know what happens.

[F4lconF16]

92. That's awesome!

I will mention it to her. The caucus is right next door to my shop, so I might be able to swing this.

Thank you very much.

[Skid Rogue]

99. There ya go...

Yea, you!!!!! Go Vote. It's worth the sacrifice.

I'm old. I promise you'll be happier if you do EVERYTHING you can to make it happen.

[wildeyed]

86. You have not been disenfranchised.

No one has deprived you of your legal right to vote. You chose to take the work hours over voting past the deadline for absentee ballots. That is a completely different situation.

I agree that caucuses are undemocratic. But the mechanism for changing that is through the state party. You have to join and participate to do that. In my state, the Democratic Party and left-leaning voting rights organizations push hard for longer early voting periods that include evening, Saturday and Sunday hours, same-day voter registration during the early vote, pre-registration of 16 year old (they can't vote until they are 18, but statistically we see better turnout from young voters who were pre-registered).

There are all kinds of mechanisms for making voting more accessible to young and working voters. But you need to organize and work for them.

[Lizzie Poppet]

89. And you don't even get to go to the con and see Band-Maid? Damn. =(

You're getting screwed over by a DNC that made its choice of candidate years ago and doesn't give a shit about any Democrat who won't buy in to their center-right choice. Fuck 'em...

[liberal_at_heart]

100. I don't blame you one damn bit. I think they set the rules up the way they do to purposefully

disenfranchise voters. You should be able to cast a surrogate affidavit all the way til March 26. There is no logical reason why you shouldn't be able to, just stupid party rules. My dad has a previous commitment to help at his church tomorrow to get ready for Easter. He did not even know about the surrogate affidavit. My legally blind husband and mother in law both voted with surrogate affidavits, but I did not know my father would be unable to attend the caucus or I would have told him about the affidavit as well. So, you are not alone and that is probably by design by the party. Speaking of purposefully disenfranchising voters, why the hell did the party set the caucus date for Easter weekend?