One thing this Presidential election cycle has made very clear is that the Democratic Primary Process is broken, and broken bad. There are some interesting alternative plans floating around, but my current favorite is the regional lottery.
Will States Fix the 2012 Primary Process?
What if the presidential primary worked more like a lottery with all the states having a chance at the ultimate prize of voting first in the nominating schedule, ending the coveted tradition of New Hampshire and Iowa leading the pack?That’s a simplified version of one of several ideas being considered by top party and state officials, who aim to prevent a repeat of states’ helter-skelter scramble for early presidential primary dates in 2008.
Comments on this Entry:
(shelby on
May 7, 2008 1:39 AM)
One important side effect to consider in reforming our nomination process is the role biofuels have in our emerging global food crisis.
Corn ethanol is a joke.
Iowa demands slavery to the corn God.
Candidates kneel before Iowa to fellate the corn god because they just want to win. They say corn ethanol is our hope.
Therefore, Iowa and its politics are making people all over the world go hungry. Nice going, Iowa.
Not that I still hate you for January 3.
(rptrcub on
May 7, 2008 6:32 AM)
The states won’t go for reform, because it would be what is right, not what is profitable. The early loading front states probably get a HUGE economic boost from a bazillion candidates buying crap in-state, from ads to arugula to pizza to beer to bumperstickers to handwarmers. And as we all know, the states won’t necessarily follow the rules set down by the national party (I’m talking to you, states fulla’ cranky-ass old people, MI and FL).
(CatherineAtlanta on
May 7, 2008 9:28 AM)
“One thing this Presidential election cycle has made very clear is that the Democratic Primary Process is broken, and broken bad.”
I don’t think this cycle has made this clear at all. I think it’s quite exciting that West Virginia and Kentucky will have a voice.
In my opinion what needs the most attention is the obscene amount of money being spent. We will top half a BILLION dollars by the time this primary is done. It’s shocking.
It’s the money and the media that has made this thing such a circus.
Sure the primary process needs to be adjusted - I can’t disagree with Shelby’s points at all, but I don’t think it’s any more obvious this cycle than last.
(Rubyduby on
May 7, 2008 9:37 AM)
Oh Shelby, get in line. I still hate Iowa for January 2004.
Stupid pig farmers.
(jac1975 on
May 7, 2008 11:00 AM)
I think we need more of a bonus for winning a state than we currently do. Close races can go on forever, and still not have a winner after the voting is done, which is the case this year. Maybe each state’s At-Large delegation should go wholesale to the state winner?
(Mouth of the South on
May 7, 2008 11:20 AM)
Well, no candidate would ever admit to buying arugula in Iowa, but it really is a bad way to nominate a president.
I thought John Edwards had missed his moment by not ending the process shortly after super tuesday. I thought his 15 delegates or how ever many were lost in the sands of time. Now he is more important than ever. That Joe Trippi is a genius.
(odinseye2k on
May 7, 2008 1:03 PM)
I think in this year we’ve found that a close primary can be an excellent tool for building up ground organizations, registering voters, and generally getting people excited about your party.
All that said, I’d say probably the best way to go is to start with retail politicking states (not just IA, NH, SC, but also places like NV, ID, WA, OK, NE, etc.) randomly chosen for a given year followed by a national primary for everyone else.
That way, good candidates without many resources *could* get promoted to the forefront, and then the all-at-once primary would prevent dragging on and probably costing more money than if the Super Tuesday had really decided.
And yes, it is criminally wasteful that we now will spend $1B+ just to decide who gets to run things for four years. It’s probably another billion when you add up all the down-ticket stuff.
(odinseye2k on
May 7, 2008 1:09 PM)
Shelby, it’s really quite amazing when I realized just how horribly corn ethanol screws us.
When you’ve got demand high, prices for all fuels, including oil are high. That means fertilizer’s high. Then, trying to push back against that, you eat up more corn fields for fuel, which then also makes food prices go high.
So no matter what you do with that option, food is still pricey.
Now, if we start hooking up algae bioreactors to some of those nice, dirty Georgia Power plants we have around here, we might be able to get somewhere.
(JerryT on
May 7, 2008 1:28 PM)
I disagree with the premise, but it could still be made better.
It’s the OTHER years where the process is screwed up, when everything is decided before even half the people get to vote. THAT is messed up.
Whose fault is it that our tolerance for extended political discourse is so limited and shallow? Our response to that should be to limit the discourse?
My suggestion is that states can open their voting process whenever they want, but they all must end on the same date. I think this would only work if every state used a primary system, but that’s OK because I think caucuses are bogus anyway. Have your caucus if you want, but then let people go vote in private.
(Sara Wara on
May 7, 2008 3:09 PM)
I really do hope reform of the process will come out of all this chaos. There’s got to be a better way to do this.
But, then, the 2000 election results didn’t exactly spur on a real movement to eliminate the Electoral College, so I doubt it will happen…
Share This
Random Posts
