2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Closed Primaries, At This Point In A Race, Make The Most Sense [View all]LisaM
(27,806 posts)I don't want a bunch of people from other parties mucking around with who chooses the Democratic candidate, and I'm pretty sure the GOP doesn't want it for the Republicans either.
I did see someone suggest that people could register for two parties, as they do in the UK (I think it was the UK). That makes much more sense to me - it would be inclusive and it would allow people who really do take a stance between, say, the Democrats and the Green Party, more chance to participate.
But the opportunity for mischief in a close race in an open primary is real, and it should scare people. There's a reason the rules exist. Should they be more uniform? Of course. But I see nothing wrong with asking for some shred of evidence that you really support the party on whose behalf you're making a choice for a presidential candidate.
We happen to have two candidates this year, in emotionally charged elections, who are outliers for the parties they're running for. It probably did expose flaws in the system. But it's pretty rich for Trump's kids to gripe that it's not fair that they can't vote in a Republican primary when they must have been well aware in October that they needed to register, or re-register, or whatever it is. For some reason even they, presumably well informed and with the means and motivation to make the change, didn't do it. I don't, however, see them as disenfranchised. They ignored the system.
I strongly support same day voter registration for the general election and for non-partisan primaries or other ballot initiatives, but the party primaries are a completely different animal.