Source
r/AskNYC•
rocketusa

Independent registered voters of NY: What have you been doing all these years? [Serious]

I've been registered to vote in New York for over 15 years. I've voted in every primary and general election since. Governors, senators, mayors, congressmen and judges. And presidential elections, too. I am an independent who registered as a Democrat over a decade and a half ago because I realized nearly every local contest was decided at the primary level due to NY's closed primary system, and that it's such a Blue state.

My question to independents is: what have you been doing all these years? Do you just vote in general elections? Do you not vote? Do you not follow politics? I'm honestly curious, because the numbers of independents in NYC are in the hundreds of thousands (millions?) and I simply don't understand how.

Posted Apr 20, 2016, 1:59 AM UTC · edited

2250
paratactical•

I vote in general elections. I follow politics. I hate both major parties and find them both to basically be everything I think is wrong with the system.

37
sokpuppet1•

I think anyone who registers as an independent is someone who doesn't understand how our politics work. They value the ability to say "hey I'm independent" over the ability to actually influence a political party. If you're not a democrat, then why should you get to choose who the democrats nominate?

12
unajodienda•

I know of recent years it is unlikely, but what if an independent really enjoys Party A candidate then next election cycle is absolutely inspired by Party B. Why should they be restricted? Isn't voting about our choice? If they're insistent on keeping it closed at least make the declaration deadline either in a reasonable date or give us the option to switch the day of voting.

0
sokpuppet1•

You shouldn't be voting for a candidate you personally enjoy. This is not a contest of which candidate you'd like to have a beer with. The decisions made in our government are too important to be swayed by someone's personality. The issues matter, and the parties haven't significantly changed their stance on those issues in more than 30 years. A standard bearer can most certainly influence people to change sides--but if you want to vote for Bernie then there's absolutely no reason you should ever consider voting republican. He couldn't be further from any of the republican party's values.

6
Theige•

Yea - it's so CRAZY that someone would register as what they actually are

0†
sokpuppet1•

It is. We're all "independent," in that we have our own beliefs and perspectives that don't always jibe with the narrow views of the two major political parties. But when you're running for public office, you've actually got to create a platform of policies that you believe in and will fight for. The Republicans and Democrats, for better or worse, have developed platforms. You can google them. These are the things they believe in. While there is diversity within the parties, and differing views on how to accomplish these objectives, they've unified millions of people in fighting for a comprehensive plan for America.

"Independent" is not a party. It has no platform. It has no plan. You could be a skinhead racist and be a registered "Independent." You could be a communist who believes in a fully socialized state, and be a registered "independent." You're basically saying, I don't believe in either the Republican or Democratic platforms. That's fine! That's totally okay! No one said you have to. This is America, you have the freedom to vote, or not vote, however you want.

What you need to understand is-- these primaries are for the political parties. They're for the people who have chosen to be Democrats or Republicans. They're not for someone who has no idea what they believe, or for someone who is on the fence, or for someone who hates both the parties. They're for people who believe in the platforms. The contest is over who can best represent that platform in the run for President. Period. If you don't believe in the platform enough to register for the party, then why should you have a say?

You can decide to become a Democrat, or a Republican, but to decide on election day or shortly before is not a sign of someone deeply committed to either party. Should New York's deadline be so far in advance? Probably not. But to open up the primary so anybody can vote despite viscerally hating the party? That makes no sense.

If you're unhappy with the two parties and what they represent, you have two main options.

Stay registered as an independent, and organize with others to create a third party. This is not unprecedented in American history. Some have done quite well. If your party grows enough and makes enough noise, and falls to one side of the ideological line, then the competing party with the most to lose will be forced to either cave and accept your agenda into it's platform. If your party falls in the middle and makes enough of a splash, then both parties will be forced to moderate their platforms to fall closer to the center. If you manage to really capture the populace, you might even drain enough support from the closest competitor that they're forced to fold completely. Unlikely, but it has happened in the past. In any case, you can work outside the party to influence the party, but it takes considerable organization and funding.

Then there's option two-- changing the party from the inside. In order to do this, you can't be an independent. You need to choose the side you're trying to change, and become a member. Then you have voting power within the party. We all saw how Tea Partiers were able to rip the Republican party sharply to the right, even getting them to give up on immigration reform. They created a powerful voting bloc within the party that threatened to become a third party-- the only way for the Republicans to win was to accomodate them. If Bernie's supporters want to change the Democratic party... they need to be MEMBERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

TL;DR: You can still be "independent" and be a member of a party. Plenty of republicans and democrats have crossed party lines to vote in elections. But if you register that way, you need to be aware that you've joined a club, and that club doesn't get to say what the other clubs do.

4
Theige•

No. It's not "crazy"

1
PissLikeaRacehorse•

I was a journalist, and it was instilled early on not to think in political party terms. I also, separate from my journalist upbringing, think the two (major) party system is the biggest fault in American Politics (electoral college and primary system a very close second/third).

All primaries should be open, on the same day, or at least a more condense schedule. And absolutely no caucuses (awesome in theory, doesn't work though in practicality, since so many people now work past 5 pm).

But regardless, I shouldn't have to be registered with a fucking party eight months in advance to put in my thought.

11
rocketusaOP•

I totally agree it should be open, I hated that I had to lie about being a Dem to have a say on who represents me in NYC and NY State. And I hate the two party system.

But did it ever bug you that, year in and year out, all of your governors, congressmen and judges were picked months before you voted? Every year. I'm trying to wrap my head around that.

9
sokpuppet1•

Are you high? All primaries should not be open. That allows raiding from the opposing political party. Republicans seeking to go against a softer opponent could pack the democratic ballot boxes. Beyond that, why should we allow those not invested enough in the political party to have a say in that party's candidate? Primaries are not part of our constitutional system, they're not supposed to be purely democratic. They're designed to help a political party choose its candidate. Only those committed to the party should make that choice. If you want a different candidate, make your own party. Pick your candidate from a spinning wheel or by dog racing. You can do that. But if you want a say in who the republicans or democrats choose, you should be a republican or a democrat. Otherwise organize, raise money, make a real third party run. If you can't do that, shut the fuck up.

4†
scrodytheroadie•

Because God forbid you have an opinion on players from the other team. Elections should be like a March Madness Bracket. We start with 64 candidates and everyone votes on every round until we're left with one person. Enough of this drawing a line in the sand non-sense. People have thoughts and opinions that are possibly more complex than just Red or Blue.

4
sokpuppet1•

Because March Madness is a perfectly democratic system with no controversy at all.

To extend your metaphor, let's say you're a UNC fan. You're facing Villanova in the championship game. Looks like Villavova has some fearsome players. So you and the rest of the UNC fans, who are inexplicably allowed to choose who UNC decides to start, decide to choose all scrubs. Or, because Villanova fans love those outside shooters, with a good long range game, they bench UNC's strong frontcourt players in favor of their shooting guards, so the game will be more of a shootout. How is any of this fair to UNC fans, who know their team, know how they want to win, and don't give a fuck about Villanova's opinion? If both teams are allowed to choose their players, it's a fair fight. If they can choose each other's players, its a farce.

There's nothing in our constitution that says there needs to be only two political parties. If you want someone other than the candidate chosen by the Democrats or the Republicans, vote for a third party. If you're worried that third party candidate has no shot, you're right. But that's because there's simply not enough people who agree with you who can get it together to organize.

Look at the tea party--they essentially formed a third party through grassroots organization. The Republicans were forced to accommodate them to maintain themselves as a party. Perhaps if Bernie's supporters were as smart, they'd be able to organize a similar insurgency. But for right now, it seems all they want to do is bitch and complain about how unfair it is that they actually had to care about this shit longer than just the past few weeks. If they'd actually cared back in October, they could have voted in this primary as Democrats. Why should the system cater to people too lazy to give a shit until they saw some videos on Facebook?

5
hirst•

... just make it to where you can only cast for one party or the other? you're just like the republicans who create problems (ie voter ID laws) for things that were never an issue to begin with.

2
PissLikeaRacehorse•

tl;dr - but if your argument is that closed primaries because of barnstorming, that's called democracy. I should be able to voice my opinion

1†
mutedcolors•

I'm kicking myself for not getting the wake up call sooner.

8
DoomPaDeeDee•

That's exactly what I did, register as a Democrat so my vote would count since all of the election outcomes here are determined in the Democratic primary.

5
Whitegook•

It's NY cronyism to ensure only well establish factions ingrained in parties have real sway on primary outcomes. The fact of the matter is many people simply don't know that you have to register for a party something like 8 months before the presidential primary. Many people just hear the rhetoric of, 'you have to vote.' And most new voters don't feel any allegiance to a particular party yet want to vote - so what's the logical outcome? Independent or 3rd party. Then they find out because they didn't register a decade before the primary that they essentially won't be able to have meaningful vote.

Also in general there's not enough valid and transparent information available online about which district you are in, where you vote, how to register and make changes to your registration, who is on the ballot, and what their track records are. It should all be available in 1-2 unified and easily navigable sources.

2†
Bacarey•

Wait... what? The Board of Elections website has all of that information. Thy have their "Poll Site Locator" where you put in your address and it tells you your district and where to vote and how to get into the building and directions and sample ballots. Don't know how to register? Click "Register to Vote". Are you registered? Click "Voter Registration Status". It is very easy. Even if you google "vote nyc" it is the first result. It is extremely transparent and easy to use- if you are able to use the internet, you should have no issue finding out all of that information.

7
rocketusaOP•

I agree the list of candidates is obscured. It can be found on the NY state elections site. But it should be posted the day before and the day of, outside of each precinct. Sort of like a restaurant shows its menu on the window before you enter.

Still, that doesn't explain why a NYer skips every mayoral and gubernatorial election only to vote in general elections for president in a state that always goes Blue in the electoral college. If there's one election in NY that consistently counts the LEAST, it's the general election in a presidential year. That's the one that usually won't make a difference if they sit it out.

4
Whitegook•

That's not just NY but everywhere.

Personally what I've found is once you get away from congressmen, senators, governors, and mayors of large cities, it's often times quite difficult to find information on who's running or whoever is even in office for that matter.

1
rocketusaOP•

In off-years, Gotham Gazette usually publishes a great guide called "The Guide for the Last Minute Voter." I've used it many times to get info on obscure candidates.

2
DoomPaDeeDee•

It is often hard to find information about all of the candidates before voting.

2
mattcassity•

How do I switch?

1
lovelikeapathy•

You can do all of that online. However, it's too late to switch for the primary (obviously). The cutoff was in October.

3
unajodienda•

I just recently moved to Upstate in Dec, and didn't know it was a Closed primary state. I have no clue how any of the voting process works besides going to your precinct and casting your vote. I had no clue primaries existed until fairly recently, and since Bernie's campaign clearly listed out all of what I needed to know to be able to vote, I found myself subject to a whole bunch of restrictions I never had even knew existed.

When I moved I chose unaffiliated because:

A.) I didn't think I'd be locked out of voting for a candidate. B.) My philosophy is that I don't like being restricted in my choices, I like seeing all sides of the coin, and then making my decision, this goes with anything in life including politics. C.) I thought I can change this in a reasonable amount of time if it came down to it, but the deadline was in October? That's ridiculous.

1
DoomPaDeeDee•

The primaries are intended for parties to choose their nominees, not for general voter participation.

The early deadline for registering was implemented over 100 years ago to prevent party leadership from picking who would be in the party to choose the nominees.

http://www.nytimes.com/live/new-york-primary-2016/law-barring-late-party-registrations/

6
unajodienda•

I know the law now thankfully and I know it's for "party-raiding" as the article states. I still think it's a weak argument for three reasons.

If party raiding is a concern for a party I think that speaks volumes about the party and candidates themselves.

People who do participate in "party-raiding" are absolutely wasting their right to vote. Alright, you're trying to take down the opposition in a rather immature manner, what about the party you are affiliated with? Now they're losing your vote and most likely a similar effect can happen in that party and lose a candidate.

Maybe it's my lack of knowledge of how Democracy works in this country, and if so, I accept the blame and faults, but this still seems to be anti-democractic.

1
DoomPaDeeDee•

There definitely needs to be changes in how it all works!

2
unajodienda•

Or at least have the deadline set not as far back.

2
sokpuppet1•

A) This is your ignorance. I've asked it before and no Bernie supporter seems to have a good answer. Why should someone who is not a Democrat decide who the Democrats nominate? Why should someone who is not a Republican decide who the Republicans nominate? If you don't identify with a party, and don't believe in their platform, who are you to choose which candidate gets to represent that platform? Either sit out, or help organize a third party insurgency that forces the party to accommodate or incorporate your viewpoints. This is exactly what the Tea Party did--they're a third party insurgency co-opted by the Republicans out of necessity-- if the Republicans had ignored them, they would never have been able to win elections.

B) Politics shouldn't reward indecision, FOMA, and waffling. There is enough difference between the Democrats and Republicans that you should know which side you stand on. Plenty of us, myself included, have opinions that straddle the line or cross the line, agree with Republicans on some things, Democrats on others. On election day, the real election day, we choose what matters more to us. We choose the candidate that represents the most, if not all, that we care about. But the process before the real election requires finding candidates who are committed to their party, finding candidates who represent the core values the party represents. Why would the parties want people uncommitted to those core values to choose those candidates? When that happens, your party falls apart. You end up nominating someone like Donald Trump, who as recently as 2008, was a registered Democrat, and who represents things that most mainstream Republicans abhor. Bernie's no Trump, but is he really committed to the ideals of the party? That's what the primary season is meant to determine. And if you're "unaffiliated," then how are you the person to help determine how closely Bernie represents what the Democratic party is for? Who knows what your values are?

C) The deadline in New York to switch parties is far earlier than any other state. I'm not sure why that is. But there should be a deadline in advance of the election, for the very reason that you want a voter who is committed. You don't want a Republican who sees Trump is expected to win easily, and decides to cross over and vote for Bernie because he believes Bernie is an easier opponent. You also don't want uninformed voters, dragged to the polls at the last second-- which is something that definitely contributed to Bernie's surprise Michigan win. A lot of those were students who'd never voted before, scarcely knew who Clinton and Bernie were, just that their buds were Bernie fans and hey "LETS START A REVOLUTION!" In a general election, I'm hugely in favor of getting people to the polls by any means possible. But when choosing someone who represents the party, I'd want people who have actually given thought to what the party represents, not people who just vote for a guy who says one line about wall street over and over. Ideally, you will have been a voter who has voted Democratic before or made the decision to vote Democratic long before the particular candidate who looked like Larry David came onto the scene. Are you committed to the principles of the Democratic Party? Or to one man? When Bernie supporters say they won't support Hillary, I think we've found our answer--these guys don't care about the Democratic party positions on the issues at all.

6
unajodienda•

Definitely true on my ignorance. You've definitely made me understand alot more of how this process functions and now I get and understand why and I thank you for that. I still don't like it, but I can't argue with how it works, because that is literally it's damn function. So now then, Bernie is practically an independent right?

2
sokpuppet1•

Yes he is an independent, while he sides with the Democrats on many issues and votes with them, he has principles which go beyond the party platform. Which is not to say his ideas are bad, or without merit. Just that if he's to be the standard bearer of the Democratic party, enough Democrats would need to express a desire to shift the party platform and include things like free college tuition, breaking up the banks, etc. You want Democrats deciding this, not those outside the party. If you want the Democrats to change, you have to commit yourself to the party and work from within, instead of trying to influence it as an outsider (or develop enough of an outside influence that your group's voting power can't be ignored, like the tea party). Unaffiliated or independent does not mean you get to vote for whoever you want-- it means you've given up any ability to be involved in party politics.

4
christinesmitth•

Just wanted to say I agree with your explanations and really enjoyed reading them- you're very eloquent in expressing your points.

2
unajodienda•

Now I get the whole picture. Thank you.

1
rathyAro•

I'm not convinced anyone should care about the values of the 2 parties or if they are probably being represented particularly for people who don't fond either party attractive. The goal is to get the candidate who is best represents you in.

1
tudorcat•

I had no clue primaries existed

Wait, what? Are you 18 and voting for the first time?

I don't like being restricted in my choices

But not registering for a party does exactly that. You can't vote in either primary, when you otherwise could vote in one of them. Registering as a Rep or Dem doesn't require you to vote that way in the general election! Literally the only thing it does is give you access to the primary.

4
unajodienda•

I'm 24. Nothing in my education ever clearly depicted the entire political process of the USA and like I said, I didn't know unaffiliating restricted my choices, otherwise I would not have done such a thing.

2
tudorcat•

I registered to vote 9 years ago at 22, on the day I became a U.S. citizen, and picked a party at the same time specifically in order to vote in the primaries. I don't remember ever being specifically taught about primaries but also don't remember ever not knowing about them. Even my parents who never went to school in the U.S. and are not fluent in English know how this works.

2
unajodienda•

I had an upbringing where I, unfortunately, did not ever run into the knowledge of that until it was too late.

1
LouisSeize•

I am registered as independent since I was in college. I'd rather slash my wrists than register as Democrat. You gave us de Blasio. Thank you so much.

And then again, the Republicans gave us Skelos, so the hell with both of them.

-3
curlyhairedsheep•

The mayoral primary was vicious a few years back. Registering with a party would have given you a say in who was on the ballot that November. BdB won the primary by about 100k votes, 38% of the total with the runner-up having 28%. These primaries have abysmal voter turnout but are when many big decisions actually get made.

10
LouisSeize•

De Blasio was elected by voters constituting 17% of the electorate. He thinks that's a mandate. Good Lord!

1
rocketusaOP•

A lot of other people ran in that mayoral race in the primary. You did watch the mayoral debates right? Weiner, Thompson, Quinn, Liu and more.

Weiner would have been much better than DeBlasio, but he couldn't keep it in his pants. What a waste.

5
ImdzTmtIM1CTn7ny•

Weiner would have been much better than De Blasio

Maybe. Very bright, but he didn't get much done in congress. His colleagues considered him arrogant and aloof. Maybe he would have matured as mayor, but he probably would have been an arrogant and aloof mayor. Giuliani got away with that for awhile, but he was running a very different city.

I think Weiner would have been a disaster. People like mayors who seem to be on their sides. Weiner just seems to be on his own side.

3
LouisSeize•

Hey, leave the snark out of this, okay?

Thompson offered nothing. Liu is ethically challenged and Quinn is almost as left wing as de Blasio. I'm not even going to mention Carlos Danger. It was essentially a ballot of losers. But Democrats get elected no matter what. That's why we have jewels like Charles Barron.

1
rocketusaOP•

If NY had open primaries, I'd definitely switch to no party affiliation. Damn straight. But until that happens, I will stick to being on the Dem logbooks, simply because I like it when my votes count.

2