Thread: California's "Open Primary" this June 5th 2012

If you are a California voter and are voting by mail, you probably have got your ballot by now. I have got mine. If you are registered to vote as a "decline to state" voter, as I am, then you do not get a ballot with the presidential party nominees, unless you chose the option to vote with a party that allows non-affiliated voters, which I did not do.

The other thing that is new with the "open primaries" is the US senate race, the California state senate race and the California state assembly race. None of these elections have submissions from party representatives. There is just one list for each and the way I understand it, you choose just one and there is a runoff between the top vote winners in the actual election for the office this November.

Some other changes are to be observed. As a registered voter in California, you are no longer considered a party member for purposes of registration. You now go on the government kept records as having a "Party Preference". Voters once registered as "decline to state" are now considered "no party preference".

This is all really weird. It is almost as though the state of California were saying, "You can't really belong to a political party, you can only express a preference for a political party." Before, it was a violation of privacy for you to be asked what your party affiliation was and now it is even worse because you are no longer even identified as having a party affiliation at all. Political parties are private institutions who are free to run their own affairs, especially when it comes to submitting a candidate for election. This all started going bad when the government started collecting party affiliation for purposes of voter registration. Now it has gotten to the point where political parties are not even being allowed to submit their own nominees at all, at least not for the US senate and state offices. They can still insist on it for the presidential election.

Is this right? It seems to me that there is a lawsuit in here somewhere, the state is usurping the partys' rights to run their own affairs. If the state insists on dictating how party affiliation weighs in the primary elections, then what is the point of having primary elections at all?

It is becoming clearer and clearer. Asking party affiliation, or "preference", is a violation of the voter's right to privacy and now, the political partys' rights to privacy. We need to abolish the keeping of government records of anything whatsoever having to do with political parties and get rid of, completely, the primary elections. We don't need them, never did and are just a corruption of our political system.

Please, would anyone care to help explain what is going on or add any details? I'm sure I've missed a few points. Comments on the legitimacy of the primaries would also be welcome.

My CA. "Nonparticsan" "Sample Ballot & Voter Information Pamphlet" list the "Party preference" of everyone running for "U.S. Senate", "U.S. Representative", " "State senator", "Member of State Assembly" and every office has a place for a "Write in".
"President" has a place for "Write In".

I don't see any problem with this.

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

My CA. "Nonparticsan" "Sample Ballot & Voter Information Pamphlet" ....

"President" has a place for "Write In".

If you register nonpartisan, why did you get a ballot with a presidential candidate? Did you opt to vote with a party who offered the opportunity to vote in their primary to nonpartisan voters?

-------------------

Anyone else care to respond to the issue?

Originally Posted by pkskyali

If you register nonpartisan, why did you get a ballot with a presidential candidate? Did you opt to vote with a party who offered the opportunity to vote in their primary to nonpartisan voters? . . .

"American Independent" is listed as a "Presidential Primary Election" choice.

See also thread:

http://www.alipac.us/f12/suspicious-...county-256774/

RELATED

http://www.alipac.us/f19/nonpartisan...fornia-258686/