Lookie Here: 85% of absentee ballots mailed to independents, had NO presidential race on them!

[reformist2]

This according to Capitol Weekly, a newspaper that monitors politics in California.

The article goes on to say that independent voters who wanted to vote in the Democratic Presidential Primary would have had to actually ask in writing for the "correct" ballot with Sanders and Clinton's names on them. Wow.

------------
CA120: Nonpartisans in a pickle

A CA120 article recently shed light on a hurdle facing nonpartisan voters in California’s June 7 presidential primary election. These voters are eligible to participate in the Democratic primary, but confusion is lurking, particularly for mail-in voters.

As a part of that story, we conducted a poll of nonpartisan voters asking if they wanted to participate in the open Democratic primary, re-register to participate in the closed Republican primary or sit out the Presidential contests entirely. Given these choices, two-thirds of voters stated that they wanted to vote in the Democratic contest.

Shockingly, 85% of the nonpartisan ballots were being mailed to voters with no presidential contest on them. But it is what came next that raised some eyebrows. When nonpartisan voters were asked how, exactly, they were going to get a Democratic ballot, we saw evidence of widespread confusion.

http://capitolweekly.net/nonpartisans-ca120-pickle-election/

[leveymg]

1. When the Republicans do it, we call it "caging".

I guess that this was just confusion.

[Major Hogwash]

10. It has become very obvious to even those paying little attention to this election . . .

. . . that Hillary's supporters do not want everyone to vote, unless they vote for Hillary.
That's not the American way.

[apcalc]

35. Ridiculous

You are suggesting Indpendents only vote for Sanders? Further, they could always go in person to vote.
Inconvenient? Not everyone can make it? Sorta like a caucus, eh?

[Demsrule86]

53. These rules have been in place for years and have nothing to do with Hillary.

Bernie ran a lousy campaign...too interested in his uuuuuuuuuuge rallies and no ground game.

[reformist2]

126. By ground game you mean deleting millions of the 'wrong' kind of Dems from the rolls.

[LanternWaste]

95. I'm beginning to think you are one of "those paying little attention to this election..."

I'm beginning to think that by accepting narrative over substance, you also are one of "those paying little attention to this election..." you so eloquently speak of, regardless of whether you're not part of the American way or not.

[Sunlei]

98. They BOTH are on the D ballot. You do understand for primary you only get to vote in ONE primary?

[Gothmog]

80. That is not what the term caging means?

Your analysis is wrong as is normal for you.

Sanders was the one who fired his ground game and staff. I had a good friend who was on the ground in San Diego for the Sanders campaign and everyone knew that NPP votes would need to be helped in learning to how to vote under the California system. Sanders decided to rely on TV ads and rallys and this is what happened.

Caging is a very different concept and only a layperson who was unfamiliar with the term would make that charge

[LiberalFighter]

86. Republicans don't call that caging.

Caging is challenging the registration status of voters and calling into question the legality of allowing them to vote.

[Lord Magus]

87. Imagine that, TC is using terms without having a clue what they mean. -nt-

[Sunlei]

92. Not caging.On the positive side, Repubs forgot to file about independent ballot request,no R ballots

[Ferd Berfel]

125. Yeah but it was her turn so now it's Cagey

and completely OK.

[ucrdem]

2. They had to either send a postcard or ask for a different ballot at the polling place.

California just started motor-voter this year and if they don't state a party preference when they register they can't get a partisan ballot unless they ask for one.

[merrily]

3. IIRC, Cali law requires indies to specifically request a Presidential ballot.

Anti-democracy bs all around us. We have to get rid of it.

[ucrdem]

4. It isn't antidemocratic. It only seems that way if you get your info from dubious sources

or campaigns.

[merrily]

13. Actually it is undemocratic and the only dubious source I've seen on the topic is your post 4.

[metroins]

38. It's a party primary

Independents have no party affiliation.

[Gothmog]

82. Sanders voters had to either register as democrats or request a democratic ballot

How else would the state know what ballot to send? Do you think that the state should send every NPP voter a copy of the Republican ballot, the Democratic ballot and the Green ballot? That is silly

[rock]

100. Sorry merrily

It's perfectly Democratic that a party would want party members to choose who their candidate is, even so they do allow the unaffiliated a means of of joining in that process if they make an effort.

[NurseJackie]

101. What nonsense!

[upaloopa]

7. No we don't

[merrily]

12. Then, maybe you can help me understand this about indie voting? (bolding is mine)

No Party Preference Information
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/

Please see also Reply 6 on this thread, which, like my prior post, says a request is necessary. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2162772

[gollygee]

16. How would they know which partisan ballot to give them unless they asked?

I don't understand the whole system. They either need to ask which ballot they want, or they won't know which ballot to give them.

And if they're getting ready to mail it in and see that there is no way to vote in a primary, can't they ask for whichever mail-in ballot they want at that point?

What's unfair about it is that it is confusing and older voters in particular shouldn't have to face such a confusing system. They should have specifically asked every time someone requested a ballot which one they wanted. The NPP option should be the one that requires a specific request. The default should be to get either a Republican or Democartic ballot. I have no idea why they set the system up this way. I doubt it was new this year, or to help Hillary.

It's a confusing system that affects voters for every candidate. A lot of those people would have been Republicans, and then some of the rest would have been Hillary voters, and the votes wouldn't have been different enough from the rest of California's voting to change things.

[merrily]

18. That is my point about getting rid of undemocratic stuff.

The primary is over now. Starting January, we all should be looking at our own state elections.

If primaries and elections and counting are not right and we don't get them right, we may as well not bother with anything else political.

Oh wait, I see what you're saying. If you are registered Dem, you get a Dem ballot. If you are registered indie, you not only have to request a Dem ballot, but you also have to request a Presidential ballot or you get a ballot that has no Presidential choice, only down ticket and ballot questions. At least, that is how I understand the info at the Secretary of State's website,

[Adrahil]

28. Like caucuses?

Personally, I oppose open primaries. Want a say in who represents my party? Join it! Independents want to have their cake and eat it too.

[merrily]

29. I don't know that caucuses are undemocratic if the people of the state party want caucuses.

I am not an indie...yet. I believe all primaries should be open or at least semi-closed as in Massachusetts. I don't believe the right to vote in a political primary is cake if you are a citizen.

However, in California, it your/our Party that says whether indies get to vote in the primary. So, your argument is circular as it applies to this thread.

[Demsrule86]

54. Caucuses limit the vote

Those of us with lives can not sit in a stupid building for eight hours in order to vote and consider how many more voters voted in Washington State in a non-binding primary than the stupid caucus. You want more people to be included- then caucuses need to go ...can't have it both ways.

[merrily]

67. Um, I never tried to have it both ways and I never said I wanted more people included.

[MadBadger]

81. You don't want more people included?

How undemocratic of you.

[gollygee]

83. If you don't want more people included

Why aren't you happy with how they're currently doing it?

[Adrahil]

75. Causcuses ARE undemocratic.

If you can;t commit the time to attend fro the whole time, you don't get a say. Gotta work? Too bad. Can't get child care? Too bad.

And I reiterate.... parties have the right to choose their OWN nominee. You want a say in a party's nominee? Join it! You want to be an independent? Fine, but don't complain because you can't tell the parties who their nominees ought to be. It's not like there entrance requirements or fees to join the party.

[merrily]

76. If the all people of the state vote to choose them? We disagree.

As for repeating, wasting of keystrokes. Doesn't make your opinion any more persuasive or authoritative You have a personal opinion about it. So do I. big whoop.

[SusanCalvin]

57. I agree, as long as you don't have to do it a ridiculous time in advance.

And I agree that independent voters who wanted to vote in this CA primary should have known the rules. Or had them explained to them by the campaign that wanted their vote.

[LiberalFighter]

96. Why is it that this was not an issue in past Presidential Primary elections in California?

Only voters that request a vote-by-mail ballot or signed up for permanent vote-by-mail get a ballot in the mail.

When a voter wants a partisan ballot they specify it on the form they fill out.

If it is confusing for anyone it is because they are likely to be newbies. Those older voters are not as confused as you think about the process.

[displacedtexan]

111. Confusing to older voters?

Well, that's insulting. I moved to CA four years ago from DC, and I haven't had one single problem voting here. And I'm getting older by the minute, as are you. As a matter of fact, there's a distinct information overload from political parties, interest groups (like the Sierra Club), and individual candidates. And they all include detailed voting info.

Every bit of info you need is right there when you register to vote. It's neither confusing nor difficult. You just have to care enough to read it.

[gollygee]

114. I'm thinking of my parents, who are about 80

And they get a bit confused sometimes, particularly my mom. Older people can get confused, and are sometimes taken advantage of because of it. There are whole scams designed to target older people because of their potential confusion.

Having to opt in to vote in a presidential primary does not seem intuitive. I think people should be specifically asked. They should not have to think to ask to be able to vote in the Republican or Democratic primaries.

[displacedtexan]

116. Are your parents new CA voters?

If so, you could have helped them figure out the rules, right?

And CA does ask every registered voter which ballot they want if they're not affiliated with a particular party. You just have to open the mail and read it. It's also included in the ballot mailing. You see, every registered voter in CA gets his/her ballot in the mail several weeks before an election. Do you and/or your parents live in CA. It doesn't read like you do.

[gollygee]

117. No they aren't

And if they're specifically asking like that, then I'll take your word for it. Thanks.

[Retrograde]

119. They could read the state voters' guide

It's sent to all registered voters about a month before each election - when there's still time to do something about problems - which contains the information cited about. It's available in multiple languages, and copies can often be found in post offices and local libraries. It's also online. California does more than most states to educate voters, but too many newer voters find it easier to get their information from Facebook, Twitter and Reddit than from a source that actually knows what it's talking about.

The primary rules aren't new. However, since the state has gone to open primary Top Two system for all state offices, and in 2012 Obama was the only candidate on the Democratic slate, the last election where this was a big factor was the 2010 primary (yes, we had one - US senator and governor were the big offices that year).

"The default should be to get either a Republican or Democartic ballot. I have no idea why they set the system up this way. I doubt it was new this year, or to help Hillary."

How are the county registrars supposed to know who wants which ballot? Guesswork? Sending out ballots at random? And what about the other 4 recognized parties - should minor parties be totally discounted?

[LiberalFighter]

88. How are the people at the local election office suppose to know which ballot to send?

If you don't specify then the default for NPP is a non-partisan ballot.

They don't know which ballot a voter wants if they want a partisan ballot. They have to specify which partisan ballot they want. Either American Independent, Democratic or Libertarian.

[2banon]

105. NPP=No Party Preference requires requesting a ballot of their choice except...

they cannot choose Republican or Green.

They can choose to request a Democratic ballot, or Libertarian, or American Independent.

Or they can choose a No Party Preference ballot which would not include any Presidential Candidates, only down ticket offices and initiatives.

Mail In NPP Voters received notice prior to May 23rd, of what they could expect when they recieve their ballots, indicating they would not be able to vote for president unless they specifically make that request prior to May 23rd.

My opinion based on working as a poll worker in my precinct on the 7th, there were a number of Mail In NNP walk in's requesting a democratic ballot surrendering their mail in ballot and receiving a N-Dem ballot (N standing for NPP) ..

But there were also a number of NPP Mail In's who, lost, forgot, or did not receive their mail in ballots, so they ended up receiving provisional ballots.

In my precinct those NPP's were no more than about 1/2 dozen at most.

Most of the Mail In NPP's seem to know in advance to bring in their Mail In ballots to surrender in order to receive a N-Dem which included Democratic presidential candidates.

There were a significant umber of Mail In's just being dropped off, signed and sealed.

My precinct is a neighborhood with a large number of apartments housing mostly mixed race Millennials.

Hope my experience helps a little to clarify.

[upaloopa]

5. NPP voters get a ballot with out the presidential primary on it. They had to request a Democratic

ballot if they wanted to vote in the Dem primary. Let's not start another conspiracy theory we have enough.





http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/no-party-preference/

No Party Preference Information
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.

[SidDithers]

8. How dare they hide that information right on their website...nt

Sid

[merrily]

17. Let the straw man rest. No one claimed California hid the info.

California, law, however has some unique features and does make indies go through a couple of extra hoops. Also, the manuals for training poll workers incorrectly stated that indies were to be given provisional ballots only. And the only people who knew that were the people training poll workers who had a better grip on the law than whoever prepared the manual. Some of them put info about the mistake up on facebook, which is how I learned of it.

I don't work for the campaign or live in Calif., but I looked into it to email my Calif friends and relatives reminders about deadlines. I told them all to be sure they were registered Democratic, not NPP, if they wanted to make sure they got a Presidential ballot and a ballot that was not provisional.

Also, if you don't read the entire article, at least reading the OP to the end helps:

But it is what came next that raised some eyebrows. When nonpartisan voters were asked how, exactly, they were going to get a Democratic ballot, we saw evidence of widespread confusion.

Neither the errors in the training manuals nor that widespread confusion when voters made the correct requests was on the Bernie campaign.

Please see also happy chick's post on this thread. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2162808

[Happyhippychick]

40. +1

[LiberalFighter]

97. Some people think it is easy for election officials to read the minds of voters

that are permanent vote-by-mail.

[CreekDog]

6. Yes, that's the law

Unless you request a party ballot before the initial mailing, that is what you get.

You seem shocked that California followed its own election laws.

I'd be shocked if the state didn't.

But thanks for your concern, though it's not a valid concern.

[qdouble]

9. Any rules in place that don't lead to a Bernie victory obviously means the election was rigged.

Otherwise, California is just another part of the confederacy.

[merrily]

19. Um, no, that's not it. See Reply 17 above. Here's the link ot Reply 17.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2162866

[Happyhippychick]

11. My aunt in California voted for Bernie

She also has no stated party and knew the correct procedure to get the correct ballot.

She is 76 years old. She has no car. She works full time and is a widow. Her kids live in NY. In other words, she doesn't have a lot of resources but it wasn't a hard thing to do if you were determined to follow the rules.

Her opinion is that if Sanders didn't do well then it is the VOTERS who didn't follow procedure because she said it was CLEAR and the sanders people gave a lot of education on the matter.

No criticism of Bernie or the system.

If a NPP has EVER voted in ANY presidential primary in CA then they KNOW what to do. It's really not a conspiracy.

[merrily]

20. Thanks. It was the state or the party and MAYBE also the voters. Please see

Reply 17: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2162866

[Starry Messenger]

14. Why would they think the SOS could read minds?

If you register as NPP, that could make your views anything. Why would it be assumed that person wanted to vote for any one party unless they say so?

The instructions to get a D ballot are clearly printed on all election materials.

[merrily]

21. You do not seem to have read the OP article.

If you are an indie who requested simply a Democratic absentee ballot, you got one with no President on it, only down ticket and ballot questions. To get a ballot to vote for President, you had request that, too, a "Democratic Presidential ballot." I don't know of a law like that in any other state.

[Orangepeel]

43. There was only one Democratic ballot. The Democratic ballot had the Democratic primary

[merrily]

44. Again, I have no clue why you are not getting it. Even just the headline of this thread contradicts

flatly your reply 43. Sorry, I don't know what else to tell you.

[Orangepeel]

47. Nonpartisan ballots were mailed to 85% of nonaffiliated voters

There is nothing in any of the posted material or in the Capitol weekly article (which I went back and read) that suggests that anyone had to request a special Democratic presidential ballot instead of or in addition to a Democratic ballot.

[merrily]

50. Um, I thought you said you read the thread?

Look, I've already said I don't know how to discuss this with you. Why are you still posting to me?

[Lord Magus]

93. I don't know who told you that, but it's not accurate.

There were not a separate "Democratic ballot" and "Democratic Presidential ballot." Anybody that requested a Democratic ballot would get a ballot with all Democratic races on it. Including the presidential primary.

[Orangepeel]

15. Was every non-affiliated voter supposed to get a Democratic ballot by default?

Of course they had to ask. how else would California know which ballot to send them?

[merrily]

22. Did you read the article?

[Orangepeel]

23. I read the post, the rest of the thread, and the website with the voting instructions

Did I click through to the capitolweekly net or whatever? No.

[merrily]

25. You read all that, including Replies 16 and 17 on this thread and still don't get it? No clue why.

[Orangepeel]

39. I get that some people were confused. But what's the solution?

Not let people vote by mail?
Not let people without a party affiliation vote in Democratic primaries?
Assume everyone wants a Democratic ballot?

Any of those would have prevented the problem, but the first two would actually make it harder to vote and the third is ridiculous.

Perhaps they could have mailed every no affiliated voter more than one postcard with the instructions, although I think that's a cost the campaigns probably should have taken on.

[merrily]

41. How about get the training manual right, train workers properly and

don't make voting laws so convoluted and punitive to indies.

[Orangepeel]

45. Of course poll workers should be properly trained. That doesn't affect vote by mail

The law is not punative to indies. It allows everyone to vote by mail (good) and lets party primaries be open to no affiliated voters. The two of those things together make it necessary for nonaffiliated voters who vote by mail to let the state know which ballot they want.

[wildeyed]

110. Then you should get right on that.

You can change laws and volunteer too. But I will warn you, it is harder than it looks.

[pdsimdars]

24. they never read the actual facts, they just find excuses and rationalizations.

And look how low they have sunk to have to try to rationalize stuff like this. And they seem totally unaware that they are doing it.

[merrily]

26. They don't seem totally unaware to me. They seem determined to take pot shots at Sanders, same as

they have since 2104. Before that, it was Warren.

[merrily]

33. In fairness, California law on this is the most convoluted I have seen yet. Of course, I know only

the 3 states in which I have lived and now a bit about California.

One way or another, it was a mess, though.

Even though the geniuses on this thread see nothing wrong, lawyers saw enough wrong to take it to court.

[Lizzie Poppet]

66. Camp Weathervane getting in its last chances to abuse the jury system, I see.

The hide on the post above you was shameful (if typical). And they wonder why so many of us refuse to come around to their wretched candidate...

[dreamnightwind]

127. Yes one of the worst hides I have seen

[Amimnoch]

30. Nothing new, nothing nefarious.

Just as if you go to the polling station to vote in a primary where independents are opened to vote the primary races, you have to specify the line you want to vote in. If you vote absentee, you either specify which party primary you want to vote in, or you just get the non party options.

Personally, I don't think anyone who calls themself an independent or non-affiliated should even get a say so in who the Democratic Party candidates are.. for POTUS or down ticket. If you want a say in who Democratic Party Candidates are, have the strength of character to at least declare yourself a member of the party.

If you do have the temerity to vote in a party that you have no loyalty to, at least have the smarts to learn how you can vote for/against the candidates running in the PRIMARY.

Oh, and to those who call this "non Democratic".. this is a PRIMARY, this is not a vote for who will hold ANY government office or official government capacity. This is ONLY a vote for who will represent one of the 2 major parties for the offices that they will be running for in the general election. This takes some serious audacity and sense of false entitlement for people to think they have some kind of right to determine the candidates for a party of which they are not even a member. Hmm.. what generation has become famous for a sense of false entitlement again? What candidate do they overwhelmingly support? I think there just might be a link there.

[Sheepshank]

106. Abso-freaking-lutely. It gets tiresome to constantly have to reiterate that which is searchable

If you do have the temerity to vote in a party that you have no loyalty to, at least have the smarts to learn how you can vote for/against the candidates running in the PRIMARY.

[Vinca]

31. Making it harder to vote seems to be the new American way.

[Demsrule86]

51. Take it up with California

Their rules. Sometimes you just have to follow the rules.

[reformist2]

123. Dems afraid of opening up the primary are defeatist and cowardly.

[Vinca]

124. Agreed. This time around there probably would have been a different ending to the story.

[seabeyond]

32. So, there were rules not followed.

[Lord Magus]

91. No, there were not.

The rules were followed exactly.

[seabeyond]

94. Yes. California followed the rules. People that didn't know the rules did not follow them. I got it!

[FSogol]

34. If Sanders supporters didn't know how it worked, that's on the campaign.

A long time ago, when I went to caucus for Gary Hart, I had no clue what I was supposed to do. Hart had a rep at each caucus site to educate and explain everything. This shielded the campaign from any political hijinks.

My local Democratic party spends a lot of time identifying college students kids of Democratic parents and seeing if they need absentee ballots.

A campaign needs to lead if they expect people to do more than just mail in checks and show up for rallies.

Why not register as a Democrat?

The AIP (American Independent Party) is a conservative group of assholes, the GOP are selfish assholes, and the libertarians are brainless assholes. Why not sign up with us DEMs?

[merrily]

42. No, the problems were not from the campaign. Please read the OP article and/or the thread.

[Demsrule86]

49. The campaign had a lousy ground game

It is their job to know the rules and act accordingly.

[merrily]

52. READ THE THREAD.

Sorry, but I am already out of patience with the bullshit on this thread.

[Demsrule86]

58. I read it

Having worked GOTV...you know state election law and you tell your voters what to do...Bernie failed miserably to do this...too many rallies not enough work on the ground game.

[FSogol]

55. There are problems inherent in every system where people are involved.

That is true even before things like competition, intentional harm, or malfeasance comes into play. A campaign has to anticipate problems and have a plan to deal with them.

As a campaign, you need to really understand the rules, educate your supporters, anticipate problems, and react. Sanders campaign was terrible at that. I remember Weaver being on an MSNBC show early on and he didn't even know that the Democratic primaries were proportional and not winner take all. It is fine if Weaver doesn't know all the rules, but he needed to bring in people who understood them. That never happened.

[merrily]

60. At least one lawsuit has been filed and I'm going to bet

the complaint does not say "We seek relief because the Sanders campaign was not adequately prepared."

So much as I respect the posts of people who were not there and have not researched relevant facts or law, I'm going out on a limb and saying something else was wrong besides lack of preparation by the Sanders campaign. And please don't reply lawyers will file anything. (Not that you will, but I've gotten that kind of reply before and it's bogus.)

I am not saying preparation was perfect because I do not know. I don't think you do either. However, I do know some of the California volunteers and they at least felt they were prepared, including for things to go wrong. And the two I know are not new to elections or stupid. I also see a post on this thread about someone's 76 year old relative who said Sanders' campaign info was on the money.

From the people saying confusion in California must have been the fault of the Sanders campaign, I am not seeing anything convincing. However, I also suspect strongly that nothing I say is going to convince them. That being the case, there's probably no point in my saying even what I have said in this post.

[FSogol]

65. I warned of the potential problems back on april 18 with this post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016152767

It's a WAPO article which explains the problem of being registered as independent in California. Had the Sanders campaign paid attention to the article or understood the potential problem, they could have started educating their supporters. They had a good word of mouth campaign and plenty of rallies, why didn't they use them to head this off? Or to get people registered correctly? Missed opportunities like this is why campaigns lose.

[merrily]

68. Sorry, I said my posting more would be pointless, but how does the fact that you posted a

warning in April pertains to what my post 60 said?

As far as the Sanders campaign not getting out the info, I am in Massachusetts and I knew the right info for California.

[FSogol]

70. You knew? Oh well, don't feel bad. I don't blame you personally for the loss.

[merrily]

71. LOL! THAT's your reply? Really? o.k. Feel bad? I don't feel the least bit bad.

[randome]

72. Well, the article sort of puts the blame on the campaigns.

This was not a deliberate attempt to help or hurt one of the presidential candidates.

These rules have been in place for years, and it really is up to the campaigns to know how to work within the existing rules — or to try to change them prior to the election cycle.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

73. What's your point? An article trumps a lawsuit? Or "I will post to merrily

the same thing that 20 people have already posted to her on this thread because Sanders?"

[randome]

78. The second thing.

I take my advice from this guy. Maybe you should, too?


[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[apcalc]

36. That's how it works in Ca

Independents must request a party ballot.

Once again...learn the rules! Duh.

[moriah]

37. I read the article, and I'm confused by the questions they asked.

Vote-by-mail voters had to request a Democratic ballot if they wanted to vote in that contest. Which best matches your situation? (Asked of 733 voters who selected “no” above)
I did not want to vote in the Democratic presidential primary: 64%

I wanted to vote in the Democratic presidential primary, but did not obtain a ballot with those options: 36%

"Did not obtain" vs "did not receive" or "did not request"? Followup would have helped there!

Then there's this part:

More than 60% of those surveyed either incorrectly thought that the Democratic candidates would be on their ballot — just like other open primary contests — or said they weren’t sure how to vote in the Democratic presidential race.

This meant that just weeks before California’s absentee ballots were to be mailed out — and after every absentee voter in the state already had been mailed instructions for how to get a partisan ballot — most nonpartisan voters were unaware of the hoops they had to jump through in order to participate in the presidential contest.

It's possible that the instructions were just too confusing (particularly if not bilingual and a good translation) but at the same time, recently 73% of US citizens asked to take the US citizenship test couldn't explain why we fought the Cold War, and 29% didn't know Joe Biden was VP.

[Starry Messenger]

46. CA sends out a multilingual instruction booklet.

I took pics of mine because this keeps coming up.

Here are the instructions:



Here is the front of the booklet, showing all the languages:

[Demsrule86]

48. I knew about that and I live in Ohio

Bernie has a lawsuit which he lost about that very issue...Sorry, that is on the campaign. It is up to them to be knowledgeable about state election law and have a ground game that takes such law into account. Those who received the wrong ballot could have turned it in for the correct ballot on Tuesday at the Polls.

[Skid Rogue]

74. Yep,

I knew about California's system this year and I'm in Alabama.

[Demsrule86]

107. Having worked GOTV for years...two for Obama

I have to tell you, I don't blame the voters...young inexperienced...that was the Bernie campaign's job. Their ground game was terrible ...should have spent money there and had fewer rallies.

[frazzled]

99. I knew about it from Illinois

There were rules, and they're not really that hard to understand.

People, if you do not register with a party, you're going to have to request a ballot to vote in that party's primary in CA. All other non-declareds are going to get a ballot with no presidential contest on it.

Every state has its own election laws. Agree with them or not, you need to follow them to vote. The campaigns and volunteers need to make sure each voter they contact knows how to vote in their state/county/precinct.

[Demsrule86]

108. Not difficult.

Volunteers and some paid staff look at the state rules...most of us know anyway and tell the campaign what is needed. We registered thousands of young voters in Ohio...and now we are concentrating on ID nonsense.

[frazzled]

113. When I canvassed for Obama in Michigan

In the general, in 2008, we were all part of a group that had driven in from Chicago. A local staff member gave us, in addition to tips and the broad outlines of our scripts, a general overview of Michigan registration and voting laws, and we were armed with the relevant papers to give to people who were still unregistered, and we were told what to tell them to do if they were unsure of their registration or polling place. (This was at the big dip of the recession, and it was a very poor city in which many people had lost their homes and were living elsewhere, with friends or relatives, so we had to give them all the dope on how to make sure they could vote properly in the upcoming election.)

This is what organized campaigns do, instead of only holding rallies to hype up their supporters. (Obama did that too, but he had one of the strongest, most disciplined ground games around.)

[Demsrule86]

118. We did the same. We had people who came from Georgia all over

We got people to the polls to and worked on early voting...many of our voters had voted before election day.

[think]

56. Laws designed to make it harder to vote are cool now on DU?

[moriah]

59. Laws designed to keep the Rethugligans from ratfucking our primaries are okay with me.

Of course, in this case, the Democrats were still more welcoming to NPP voters than Republicans were.

[LonePirate]

61. How is the election office supposed to know to send a Dem ballot or a Repub ballot or neither?

[CrowCityDem]

62. It makes sense. If you're not a party member, they can't know you want to vote in the Dem primary.

You register unaffiliated with a party for a reason.

[Lizzie Poppet]

64. Oh, but we have democracy in this country!

[oberliner]

79. If you want to vote in a party primary, register as a member of that party

It's not complicated.

In the general, everyone can vote for whomever they want.

[kadaholo]

69. MUST SEE VIDEO...

...fabulous video which demystifies the election fraud that has been going on throughout the Primary 2016. Please kick and recommend to everyone you know!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017383287

[Gothmog]

77. A lack of a ground game killed Sanders

Sanders fired his ground staff and relied on ads and rallys. That plan meant that there was no one to help voters request the right ballot and the result was the fact that 85 of NPP voters did not request a democratic ballot. The main goal of the Sanders ground game was supposed to be to help voters request the right ballots

[mountain grammy]

85. Probably true, but you can't deny

the success of his campaign.. he was almost unknown and Hillary had the Democratic machine behind her, and yet he managed to defeat her in several states. True that Bernie's been an Independent and out of party politics, but so are his supporters and there are good reasons for that. However, the only way to change things are from the bottom up. Bernie did that in Vermont, and, given more time, I think it would have happened nationally. Many of his supporters were new to the game, but, in my district, they hung in there until the bitter end, and they're still attending local events and meetings. Liberals are rising, and that's a good thing for this old lady. Now, Hillary supporters must resist the urge to be vindictive in their victory and try not to alienate a whole new generation of Democrats.

[wildeyed]

112. Yes. I hope that the "old school" realizes how unhappy

most voters are with the system and allow it to adapt. I am a Clinton supporter, but I have been saying for YEARS that the gerrymandered districts and the rigid two-party system need to change. People are NOT happy. Love Bernie Sanders or hate him, you gotta admit, that HAPPENED.

It is also on the Sanders voters to get their asses in gear and be the change. OPs like this one that are just undisciplined whinging and sour grapes are not going to get it done. Showing up at the polls every year and volunteering at the local level will.

[nadinbrzezinski]

104. You realize this confusion happens every four years independent

Of who is on the ballot right? To the point that if you are media you should be ready to write and run at least two articles? The system is confusing, in particular to new voters and older voters. Plus we did have shennanigans. Yeah voter integrity project looking at it.

There are ways to fix it, and make it less confusing. Neither major party and the 4 minor ones want that.

[Demsrule86]

109. Not convinced with all the coverage the big rallies got

that he needed ads, but he needed a ground game.

[Gothmog]

84. A lack of a ground game killed Sanders

Sanders had no ground game at all in California. Sanders fired this ground game and decided to rely on TV ads and rallys. The Clinton team had a great ground game that killed Sanders https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/08/how-hillary-clinton-won-california/

Another critical factor: The state’s primary rules favored candidates who were meticulously organized and mobilized at the grass-roots level.

In 2008, more than half of the ballots cast in California were mailed in. Those voters tend to be reliable Democrats, and they also tend to be older. The Clinton campaign zeroed in on individual ballots, securing thousands of votes before primary day arrived.

"We just had a far superior ground game that was laser like focused on the early vote. That was a strategic focus on the campaign," said Buffy Wicks, Clinton's California state director. "We focused on this diverse coalition: women, African Americans, Latinos, AAPI voters.

"California is a majority minority state and the diversity of this state really lends itself to her and the diversity of the country will really lend itself to her in a general election," she added.

A lack of ground game is what hurt Sanders

[Sunlei]

89. all states are different.Ca. independents only get to vote for independents. stupid but in the rules

ask for a ballot and can get a D ballot...Republicans were to late to 'file' and independents can't even request a R ballot.

[Retrograde]

120. No, this is not correct

Instructions from the California Voters' Guide, which is sent go all registered voters and has been cited here many times.

[Sunlei]

121. I know, they can request a ballot. On the positive side, In's couldn't request a republican ballot.

[Prism]

90. My ex's registration was changed

He's been registered Dem since he could first vote. This year, rather magically, he became NPP.

Fortunately, he's an in-person voter. If he'd been mail in, he'd have gotten hosed.

But his ass experienced a chapping.

[Agnosticsherbet]

102. Unless a declined to state voter equestrian one, they are not sent.

The registrar does not read minds.

[nadinbrzezinski]

103. I ran several stories on this telling people

They needed to request those. The registrar out out several news releases. That does not mean tne system is not confusing. It is. And it did not start this year.

[2banon]

115. I believe it was an unnecessary hurdle to jump through

Since it's ok for NPP's to specifically request a Democratic Ballot, a Libertarian Ballot, or American Independent Ballot, NPP ballots should just include all of the above Presidential candidates and save trees and tax payer money in printing out all of the different ballot categories (enormous waste) - why not eliminate that hurdle altogether?

[Retrograde]

122. A history of No Party Preference voting in California

Including a link to a list of which parties allowed NPP voters in which primary elections - it changes from primary to primary - can be found here.

Last week I found the scans of the actual letters the parties sent to the Secretary of State at the web site, but can't locate them now.