A Simple - Maybe Too Simple - Solution To The Primary Election Date Mess

[ThomWV]

Small states and states that hold their primary elections have precious little if any say in who the Party nominee might be. Large states Like Florida moving their primary elections up in time make the problem even worse. A huge block of delegates are designated for an early front runner, later events be damned. Everyone wants to be first - there is campaign money for their state in it and their is the ego factor too. There seems to be little care for the millions of Democrats living in states that vote later. What to do?

How about the Party mandating mail-in votes for all primary states with all of them to be counted on the same day - and just for shits and giggles make that day one week before the Convention.

[TheDoorbellRang]

1. Well, that would never work. It's too practical.

Actually, I like it.

But one question -- why mail-in votes?

[Warpy]

2. I've got a better idea

I would like to see regional primaries. I would like to see the dates rotated so that each region would have a chance to be first in an election cycle.

The advantage to this one is consolidating the area the candidates have to travel, making it more likely they'd visit every state in the region and be covered by local news, if the national news is still corrupt. Rotating the regions would stop the sour grapes from big states about having nothing states in flyover country picking the president (which doesn't happen, by the way, the candidate is chosen by number of delegates from all states).

As the cost of travel continues to climb, this will make more and more sense.

The present system of each state clamoring to be first and pushing things back so far that the convention becomes an afterthought is crazy.

[dysfunctional press]

3. there's one problem with that method-

if the region has one or two "big" states, that's where the candidates would campaign most.

i agree with the idea of rotating the order of the primaries- but i think the states should be grouped by population size instead.

[Warpy]

5. Great, then you'd have exhausted candidates flying back and forth

between NY and California. That is not a great idea in this time of escalating transportation cost.

[dansolo]

7. Don't rotate regions

The first primaries should be simultaneous, and should be a cross section across all regions. I want to see the initial primaries be as close to a representative sample of the country, so it should cover states in all regions, and include states with both rural and urban populations. They would need to be relatively small so as to allow those who don't have a huge funding machine behind them to at least get a chance to be heard.

[pinto]

4. My pet proposal is a three-tiered primary system, over 6 months.

For states choosing to have a primary/caucus:

2 months the bottom tier (smallest population/electoral states)
2 months the middle tier (medium population/electoral states)
2 months the top tier (blockbuster handful of largest population/electoral states)

It's likely a candidate would not be chosen early in the process, would give some voice to smaller states in the process, allow some time - in a limited framework - for a broad range of candidate 'exposure' and would be fairly diverse by region.

Fat chance, but I've always likes this idea.

[EST]

6. How about counting them as they come in, so the

"momentum" effect would still be in play. Rather than "winning a particular state's primary and its delegates, all the votes would be strictly cumulative, although the primaries and the associated deadlines would still be in place.
That way there would be a specific end time for campaigning in any particular state or region.

[frazzled]

8. There's a reason for the Iowa/New Hampshire tradition

Though it wouldn't always have to be Iowa and New Hampshire.

The kind of retail politicking that goes on in these two relatively small states allows small-group interaction with candidates, allows people to have an up-close-and-personal interaction with them: not from TV ads, not from large rallies with canned speeches--but real town-hall meetings, or pancake breakfasts in which questions can be asked and that je-ne-sais-quois that lets you assess an individual's moral compass, personal interactive skills, etc. comes through. And honest to god, almost everyone participates; everyone is aware. People show up in droves to town meetings and backyard house parties. They are totally engaged.

This could not happen in a same-day primary. Costs (already obscenely high) would skyrocket. The canned candidate would predominate.

Here's my simple solution: have two "first" primary states, but rotate them each election cycle. Well, maybe that wouldn't work, either. I've never been to Iowa during primary season, but I have spent lots of time in New Hampshire: there's years'-worth of structure in place there to carry this kind of thing off. I'm sure it's the same in Iowa. Accomodating this kind of event is not something easily or quickly accomplished. Not to mention cultivating the voters to be engaged in the process.

But then, I have trouble with change in general.

[yewberry]

9. Yes, there is.

I'm less familiar with IA than I am with NH, but there are things about NH that would be hard to duplicate.

There's a large independent voting bloc. NH law requires only a $1000 fee and membership in a recognized party to get on the ballot. NH randomizes the order of names listed on ballots to ensure everyone has equal footing. There is one statewide TV station and few statewide newspapers, but many, many smaller papers that cover candidates. The spending cap for candidates using federal funds is very low compared to larger states (though I'd like very much to see all candidates staying below that cap). NH is small and it's easy to get from one place to the next.

NH votes a lot. Turnout is about twice the national average. They elect a new governor every 2 years and citizens participate in lots and lots elections. There are 400 house members, for goodness' sake. They are always in election mode, and they've had generations of experience with this primary and coalition-building. NH politics is grassroots politics.

I don't know how to build that into a portable primary.

[LWolf]

10. I like this idea.

Of course, I'm in Oregon, where we do all our voting by mail anyway.

A "primary by mail" system would allow primaries to be spread evenly, giving candidates a reasonable opportunity to campaign in those places. As long as no ballots are opened or counted, and no exit polls released, until the last primary is done, then early primaries don't exclude or marginalize those that happen later.

My 2008 primary is in late May. Think you can get this organized in time for my primary to mean something this cycle? ;)