skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

Nonpartisan Voters Cannot Vote In Republican Primary

Deborah Seiler, Registrar of Voters
Enlarge this image

Above: Deborah Seiler, Registrar of Voters

Nonpartisan voters can request ballots from the Democratic and the American Independent parties, but not the Republican party. And if they don't request ballots in advance, they won't get to vote for any candidate in the June 5 presidential primary.

In the last presidential primary, some nonpartisan voters were confused and even upset because they didn't understand the rules, said Deborah Seiler, the county's registrar of voters. Twenty five percent of voters in San Diego are nonpartisan.

"They will receive a nonpartisan ballot," she said. "It will not have any contest for president on it. This is very important for those one in four voters to understand what their ballot is going to look like.”

“Unless they specifically request a presidential primary that's open to them or they would have to re-register with another party to vote," she added.

The Republican, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom and Green parties require voters to reregister and join them in order to cast a ballot for one of their candidates.

“The parties have the choice. The parties make those decisions,” Seiler said. “It’s not the elections official. We just want the public to be aware of those decisions the parties have made."

Sample ballot information is mailed out in a month. Even though party affiliations must be mailed, voters can check their registration or request to change it online. The cutoff date to change registration is May 21.

To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.


Avatar for user 'debwabd'

debwabd | March 26, 2012 at 4:46 p.m. ― 4 years, 12 months ago

Thank you for the information. As a non-partisan who has never been a member of a political party, I find myself thinking this:
"If a political party demands I must join their ranks in order to vote in the primary [to make my voice heard in selecting the nominee], then I will never vote for their selected candidate in the general election ".

Hence, I will have the choice between the Democrat nominee/candidate and the American Independent nominee/candidate come November.

Frankly, this is a very bad move by the other parties -- as non affiliated is the fastest growing political identity in the state and the country.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'CaliforniaDefender'

CaliforniaDefender | March 26, 2012 at 5:21 p.m. ― 4 years, 12 months ago

Agreed. But isn't it easy for the Democratic Party to accept independent voters when there is only one choice on the primary ballot?

Don't be fooled, both Democrats and Republicans have an equal stench of exclusivity.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | March 26, 2012 at 7:10 p.m. ― 4 years, 12 months ago

CaliforniaDefender, while I agree Dmocrat politicians can certainly be slimy in some respects, nobody comes close o other exclusion the way the Republican Party does.

This story is only the tip of the iceberg.

Republicans in states across the country are engaged in passing many laws that would make it far more difficult for the poor and minorities to vote.

*Rolling Stone* did a great article on it last year:

An excerpt:

*"As the nation gears up for the 2012 presidential election, Republican officials have launched an unprecedented, centrally coordinated campaign to suppress the elements of the Democratic vote that elected Barack Obama in 2008. Just as Dixiecrats once used poll taxes and literacy tests to bar black Southerners from voting, a new crop of GOP governors and state legislators has passed a series of seemingly disconnected measures that could prevent millions of students, minorities, immigrants, ex-convicts and the elderly from casting ballots. "What has happened this year is the most significant setback to voting rights in this country in a century," says Judith Browne-Dianis, who monitors barriers to voting as co-director of the Advancement Project, a civil rights organization based in Washington, D.C."*

( | suggest removal )