Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Partisan primaries failed to vet President Biden

President Joe Biden
Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Gruber is senior vice president of Open Primaries, a national election reform organization. Opdycke is president of Open Primaries.

This year’s Democratic Party presidential primary was a choreographed affair dubbed “ Operation Bubble Wrap.” The rules were manipulated by party insiders to ensure Joe Biden would face no scrutiny and no competition. The idea that he should stay in the race because he “won the primary” is absurd. There was no primary. By design.

Leaders of both parties have been manipulating the primary election system for years. This year, though, leaders of the Democratic Party went to draconian lengths to shield President Biden from voters. Now, with his cognitive decline on full display, it's become clearer than ever how the current system — which should have revealed his deficiencies as well as his attributes — is not serving the public interest. It’s time for a change.


Primaries were designed to work differently. One hundred years ago, decades of corrupt bossism provoked calls from voters to bring the public in at the beginning of election season. The reformers at the time called these the “people’s primaries.” Today leaders of both parties have structurally manipulated the system to cement their control under the false claim that these elections are “theirs.”

That’s most obvious in the patchwork of closed primaries that shut out independent voters, who are now, at 51 percent of the national electorate, a larger share than Republicans and Democrats combined. Half the states in the union close their presidential primaries to independent voters. As both parties stagnate, an increasingly small number of partisan voters are calling the shots.

But voter access is only half the problem. Equally challenging is the very way primary elections are run. We allow the parties to control the rules of these elections. It doesn’t have to be this way. Most countries hold nonpartisan elections, administered by an independent authority.

The problem with partisan-run primaries was on full display earlier this year, when Democratic Party insiders manipulated the rules in real time to ensure there was no competition. Not only did they anoint Biden and put out the word among the faithful that he was not to be challenged, but when insurgent primary candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Dean Phillips began running on platforms questioning the president’s fitness, they changed the rules to marginalize them.

The Democratic parties in Florida and North Carolina canceled their primaries altogether, declaring Biden the winner. The Democratic Party of Wisconsin left Phillips — a sitting member of Congress — off the primary ballot and had to be sued all the way to the state's Supreme Ccourt to add him back. All discussion of primary debates were quickly scuttled. That’s why this year was so different. The Democratic Party didn’t just shut out independent voters, it robbed Democratic Party voters of the opportunity to play a meaningful role in the nominating process.

At the time, none of the elected leaders and pundits that have since called for Biden to leave the race questioned the party’s undemocratic actions. In fact quite the opposite, they piled on their criticism of any challengers — from No Labels to Kennedy. Imagine if Biden had faced a competitive primary. The American public ( including George Clooney) would have had the opportunity to see his limitations as well as his attributes directly and make an informed choice.

Now some of these same leaders are calling for some semblance of a “blitz primary.” As the days wane on, even this Hail Mary approach seems less and less likely, as it’s partisan leaders — not the public — once again who are in the decision-making role.

And that’s the challenge. Presidential primaries don’t select candidates, they select delegates to a convention who will vote on the candidates. And while states have limited the independence of delegates over the years, the very partisan nature of these contests have dissuaded reformers from challenging them.

But challenge them we must. Any trust in leaders of either party running our primaries in the public’s interest, rather than their own evolving interest, is gone. Their contempt for voters — independent and party voters alike — is on full display.

One state — Arizona — is bringing an innovative approach to the problem with a ballot initiative this November that would tie the continuation of public funding to a more open presidential primary process. Let’s take that idea national. These are our elections. We pay for them. It’s time for the American people to regain control of the presidential primaries.

Read More

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for U.S. Senate, speaks at an event in Lubbock on Oct 7, 2025. Paxton is seeking to shut down Jolt Initiative, a civic engagement group for Latinos, alleging that it's involved in illegal voter registration efforts. The group is fighting back.

Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune

Jolt Initiative Hits Back at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in Fight Over Voter Registration

Jolt Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to increase civic participation among Latinos, is suing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to block his efforts to shut the organization down.

Paxton announced Monday that he was seeking to revoke the nonprofit’s charter, alleging that it had orchestrated “a systematic, unlawful voter registration scheme.”

Keep ReadingShow less
MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

A deep dive into ongoing threats to U.S. democracy—from MAGA election interference and state voting restrictions to filibuster risks—as America approaches 2026 and 2028.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

MAGA Gerrymandering, Pardons, Executive Actions Signal Heightened 2026 Voting Rights Threats

Tuesday, November 4, demonstrated again that Americans want democracy and US elections are conducted credibly. Voter turnout was strong; there were few administrative glitches, but voters’ choices were honored.

The relatively smooth elections across the country nonetheless took place despite electiondenial and anti-voting efforts continuing through election day. These efforts will likely intensify as we move toward the 2026 midterms and 2028 presidential election. The MAGA drive for unprecedented mid-decade, extreme political gerrymandering of congressional districts to guarantee their control of the House of Representatives is a conspicuous thrust of their campaign to remain in power at all costs.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person putting on an "I Voted" sticker.

Major redistricting cases in Louisiana and Texas threaten the Voting Rights Act and the representation of Black and Latino voters across the South.

Getty Images, kali9

The Voting Rights Act Is Under Attack in the South

Under court order, Louisiana redrew to create a second majority-Black district—one that finally gave true representation to the community where my family lives. But now, that district—and the entire Voting Rights Act (VRA)—are under attack. Meanwhile, here in Texas, Republican lawmakers rammed through a mid-decade redistricting plan that dramatically reduces Black and Latino voting power in Congress. As a Louisiana-born Texan, it’s disheartening to see that my rights to representation as a Black voter in Texas, and those of my family back home in Louisiana, are at serious risk.

Two major redistricting cases in these neighboring states—Louisiana v. Callais and Texas’s statewide redistricting challenge, LULAC v. Abbott—are testing the strength and future of the VRA. In Louisiana, the Supreme Court is being asked to decide not just whether Louisiana must draw a majority-Black district to comply with Section 2 of the VRA, but whether considering race as one factor to address proven racial discrimination in electoral maps can itself be treated as discriminatory. It’s an argument that contradicts the purpose of the VRA: to ensure all people, regardless of race, have an equal opportunity to elect candidates amid ongoing discrimination and suppression of Black and Latino voters—to protect Black and Brown voters from dilution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’
Independent Voter News

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’

The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation.

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project developed a “Redistricting Report Card” that takes metrics of partisan and racial performance data in all 50 states and converts it into a grade for partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.

Keep ReadingShow less