Yeah, this *is* no way to elect a President.
Mind you, I'd go in the opposite direction than Broder would.
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
David's not too keen on the way the state primaries spacing's turning out (via RCP):
The mad rush of states to advance their nominating contests in hopes of gaining more influence has produced something so contrary to the national interest that it cries out for action.
The process is not over. Just last week, Florida jumped the line by moving its primary up to Jan. 29, a week ahead of the Feb. 5 date when -- unbelievably -- 22 states may hold delegate selection contests, either primaries or caucuses.
Read on.
He goes on to point out that the aforementioned mad rush, coupled with the stubborn holdouts for later primaries, could have interesting effects:
This crazy calendar sets up one of two scenarios -- both scary. If one candidate in each party wraps up the nomination by gaining momentum in the January contests and amassing delegates on Feb. 5, we will be looking at the longest, most-dragged-out general election ever. The conventions are late in 2008; the Democrats' the last week in August, the Republicans' the first week in September. The time from February to Labor Day will be boring beyond belief.
But if nothing is decided by the night of Feb. 5, the chance of a quirky result from the oddity of the political geography of the remaining states will be greatly increased. Democrats will have to compete in Indiana and North Carolina, where they rarely win in November. Republicans will be judged in Massachusetts and Vermont, where their party membership is minuscule.
OK, fine: it's going to be a problem. Mind you, it'll be a problem mostly for the following groups: political parties, Presidential candidates and professional pundits (we amateurs can always blog about our cats or our pajamas, or perhaps our cats in pajamas). The American populace will probably yawn about it all - and the older I get, the more comfortable I get with the notion that sometimes the American populace has the right instincts in yawning. Nonetheless, all three groups are comprised of American citizens themselves, and they do have some right to input.
So let's fix this in a drastic fashion. All primary contests should take place on the first Tuesday in May. No exceptions, no weaseling, no cute stuff. That gives six months between the primary and the general elections, which is surely enough time for anybody who hadn't made up their mind already to get on with it.
I'm aware that this won't happen, but it'd solve the problem neatly - and I think that I can already answer the major objections. Will it hurt minor candidates? As in, more than the current system does? Not seeing it, honestly. Things aren't exactly currently set up to give anybody except the top tier people a legitimate shot at a major nomination. Will this mean more brokered conventions? Quite possibly. So what? Will candidates have to run around a lot and make frantic calculations about which States to hit, and how often, before Primary Day? Again, quite possibly; and again, so what?
Mind you, I just survived my first 2 to 4 hour night-time feeding cycle with the new baby, so it's entirely possible that the above is mere psychotic ramblings. Or ravings. Or both...
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Romney's Wife Gave to Planned Parenthood, Too — Comments (61) »
Yeah, this *is* no way to elect a President. 4 Comments (0 topical, 4 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Out of respect for history, Iowa and New Hampshire hold primaries/caucuses in mid-April (right around tax day, just to remind us that voting is important). Then, two weeks later, the rest of the fun begins.
During the four tuesdays in May (or first four in an odd year) 12 states hold primaries/caucuses each tuesday. And those states are divided this way: In January of the election year three hats are filled with slips of paper bearing the names of the 12 largest, middle, and smallest states based on electoral college vote (because convention delegate votes would not be the same for R's and D's in each state). In a televised event in January, we have the drawing to determine which primaries and caucuses happen when. You simply draw three from each hat for each Tuesday, announcing them as you go.
Some years California will be up first after Iowa & NH. Some years it will be last. Either way, a more compressed schedule like this will mean that the actual government that was elected the last time we had one of these elections will have a fighting chance of accomplishing something for a longer period of time. Under our current system where we hold primaries/caucuses for 6 months and debates a year in advance, any problem that actually needs Washington's attention (like the war for example) necessarily becomes a political football. MAYBE the tendency toward this wouldn't be as great if the whole process was compressed and later.
And of course, I'd not want this to be done through federal legislation but rather some sort of agreement among the states and parties. Federalism and all that.
So let's fix this in a drastic fashion. All primary contests should take place on the first Tuesday in May. No exceptions, no weaseling, no cute stuff. That gives six months between the primary and the general elections, which is surely enough time for anybody who hadn't made up their mind already to get on with it.
Sure, let's just be idiots and ruin the process and make it so NOONE who can't raise $150 million can even have their voice heard. Brillant. Not.
don't pick the nominee until the convention. at the convention, the competing groups of each party will work to develop a majority behind one candidate.
this is most likely to produce candidates which embrace most of the party rather than candidates who cater to the extreme voters in primaries (a problem especially on the Left).
parts of the base of each party may be unhappy, but the majority of americans will be better represented. Both candidates will be closer to the middle of the country rather than to one of the two poles.
"During my lifetime, all our problems have come from mainland Europe, and all the solutions from the English-speaking nations across the world." - Thatcher
...so it's entirely possible that the above is mere psychotic ramblings. Or ravings. Or both...
I think not. Makes perfect sense to me. Maybe we should push the primaries back to just 90 days before the general election. I get tired, so tired, of all the ads and campaigning. Give us a break from all the blather.