I remember watching Senator Sanders complaining that so many of his independent supporters were not allowed to vote in the New York primary. While I understand the need for Democrats to choose their nominee without interference from Republicans and right leaning independents, I believe that New York’s six months party switching requirement is too excessive. Perhaps it should be reduced to 4 – 6 weeks. Honestly, I prefer that people switch before the first vote is cast in a primary season.
What really bothers many people is the insinuations that Senator Sanders lost the 2016 primary fight in part because independents are barred from voting in some States. Records clearly shows that Secretary Clinton won majority of States with open and semi-closed primaries. Anytime I hear the talk of opening all future primary contests to Independents and Republicans, I always get the impression that it is merely an attempt to delegitimize a fair and hard won victory by Secretary Clinton.
It would have been more understandable if the talk of a primary reform is taken place after the November election. However, the fact that Senator Sanders has not even conceded makes it look like a pretense to show that the 2016 primary was somehow rigged.
In 2008, an insurgent named Senator Obama went through the same primary process. He won and no one claimed that the process was rigged. Even though he lost 9 of the last 12 primary contests that year, no one claimed that he limped to the finish line. Less I forget, Secretary Clinton threw her support behind him enthusiastically and unconditionally within days. One may say that the then Senator Obama rewarded such unconditional support by helping to retire her debts with eventual offer of a cabinet position.