Primaries...... Gotta love 'em...

[keeblercrumb]

Okay..... Here I am outa the loop again.... Watching on the international news as we show our ass to the world yet one more time. Actually, the underlying race is very interesting to the rest of the world but the "system" for getting there is a puzzlement for all... including Americans...

Good things about the current system....

1. Believe it or not, it is a major improvement on it's predecessor.... which was one big "backroom" deal....
2. It stretches out the process which allows us to weed out most of the candidates..... This narrowing of the field, I believe, is a very good thing so we don't have to sit through 75 ballots at the conventions.....
3. There is no number 3.

Bad things about the current system. (In no particular order):

1. "Super Delegates" aka "backroom deals".
2. Mind numbingly too long.. Why can't we wrap this whole thing up in a month? Say East to West? South to North? Alphabetically? Small to Big?
3. 51 different sets of rules for selecting delegates to the convention... and we call these "National Parties"
4. Caucuses...... Totally ridiculous process dependent on ward bosses and the weather.
5. Expensive.... but at least it "stimulates the economy"....
6. Selection by "gaff" Few voters actually worry about the thing until we get down to a manageable number of candidates. This seems to be accomplished by relying on the media to count "gaffs" which will make it all simpler... It also discourages anyone actually saying anything.
7. Iowa and New Hampshire. Every four years… their time in the sun….. If we are going to stick with meaningless states to start with, why not Delaware? We were, after all, the First State!
8. How could I forget??? "Disallowing” or limiting delegates to the convention because they changed the date of that state's primary/caucus!! A little perspective here? A $5 fine would be more appropriate than disenfranchising an entire state’s party members.

Of course, you may well disagree.... some very nice people here even think the "Electoral College" is a "good" idea. Takes all kinds...



-KC

 

[colddiesel]

Faulty yes, but several orders of magnitude better than anything Putin, Mugabe, Saud et al can offer.

 

[keeblercrumb]

Faulty yes, but several orders of magnitude better than anything Putin, Mugabe, Saud et al can offer.

Absolutely..... There is NO campaign in Russia and this is the actual election coming up (For Putin's "successor")!

Inherent differences in the Parliamentary system make comparisons with those nations messy but as for the process of selecting a "Party's" candidate (or Leader), the primary system has more pretense to democracy than virtually any that I am familiar with.

Having said all that.... our system is in urgent need of overhaul. The problem is that it has to be done by the "winner" and they tend to prefer the status quo.... because it worked for them personally!!!

-KC

 

[keeblercrumb]

(But have no doubt that in Russia, the vast majority support Putin, no matter how the election is run).

-KC

 

[Weird Harold]

Having said all that.... our system is in urgent need of overhaul. The problem is that it has to be done by the "winner" and they tend to prefer the status quo.... because it worked for them personally!!!

Since the Primaries are Party functions, and organized on local (state) level, I dont see why the "losers" can't reorganize -- as Nevada recently did.

The major problem with the Primary System is that the really good candidates who are palatable to the Independents (and "third" parties) get eliminated.

I'd like to see one big national primary with every aspirant from every party on a single ballot. Each voter picks three names and the top three names go on the general election ballot in Novemeber -- regardless of party affiliation.

Or the most votes by party -- One Republican, One Democrat and One from neither party.

Have the National Primary six month before the General Election -- Say on June Sixth to celebrate D-Day.

 

[sr71plt]

Since the parties could choose anyone they wanted to put up by any means they chose, including the most secretive, I think the primary/caucas system is a "good" thing and a way for the grassroots voters to send signals to their parties. It's almost self-evident that McCain wouldn't be a Republican frontrunner (or in the mix at all, frankly) or that Obama wouldn't be neck and neck with Clinton without the primary/caucus. I think the "messy," individualistic nature of the separate state primary/caucus systems also helps take a bit of the central control out of the hands of party insiders as well--so is also good.

 

[cantdog]

Since the Primaries are Party functions, and organized on local (state) level, I dont see why the "losers" can't reorganize -- as Nevada recently did.

The major problem with the Primary System is that the really good candidates who are palatable to the Independents (and "third" parties) get eliminated.

I'd like to see one big national primary with every aspirant from every party on a single ballot. Each voter picks three names and the top three names go on the general election ballot in Novemeber -- regardless of party affiliation.

Or the most votes by party -- One Republican, One Democrat and One from neither party.

Have the National Primary six month before the General Election -- Say on June Sixth to celebrate D-Day.

Or June 10th, Mad Hatter day.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Faulty yes, but several orders of magnitude better than anything Putin, Mugabe, Saud et al can offer.

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Winston Churchill, House of Commons, November 11, 1947