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

Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

AndreyPopov/Getty Images

When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close-up shot of a Black woman's hands receiving a mail-in ballot to vote in a USA Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, or local election

An immigrant's perspective on why America's election debate over security vs. access is a false choice — and how USPS mail ballot rules fit in.

Jeremy Poland/Getty Images

Ballot Security and Voter Access Are Not Opposites: What the USPS Ballot Rule Gets Right

I came to the United States from India in 1982. In Indian elections, I watched officials check voter identity and mark a voter’s finger with indelible ink. Party representatives observed the process. The system was imperfect, as every large democracy is, but it sent a simple message: casting one vote is a serious civic act, and the process should make that clear.

When I later became an American citizen and cast my first ballot, the experience felt very different. A poll worker found my name on a list and handed me a ballot. In my precinct, there was no photo identification check. I was surprised—not because I expected voting to be difficult, but because I expected a system as consequential as an election to have clear, visible safeguards.

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

Uncontested elections are more common than you'd think. From open primaries to multi-member districts, here's what states like California and Alaska are doing to bring real competition back to the ballot — and what it'll take to change political culture, too.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

What America Can Do About Its Uncontested Elections

Politics nerds have many ideas about how to strengthen American democracy; however, few directly address silent elections. For example, ranked-choice voting does nothing to encourage more candidates to run if there are not enough. Term limits increase turnover, but even newcomers can frequently run uncontested in general elections if they have won competitive primaries.

Fortunately, the cause isn’t hopeless. For one, tightening campaign finance laws would put potential challengers on more even footing with corporate-backed politicians, encouraging more candidates to run. Independent redistricting would also help. The Cook Political Report, a poll aggregator, considers only 69 of America’s 435 House districts competitive. Fair redistricting means more competitive districts and therefore more contested elections.

Keep ReadingShow less