If you could design a perfect primary, how would you do it?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

This is a question that I am not asking in GDP for a single reason, people will support the rules that makes their current nominee win. A post-hoc justification or desire to change rules. There are usually more thoughtful voices here, so I thought I'd ask it here.

Here are some of the issues as I see them

1. Open vs Closed

- I support closed primaries, because to me people voting in the primary should be closely aligned to the parties vision. People who are generally unaligned, should not be picking who the party puts forward as their best candidate. But that's just my opinion.

2. If you believe it should be closed, how soon to the date of a primary can you switch?

3. Primary vs Caucus

To me this is a no brainer, caucuses are deeply disenfranchising for multiple reason (times, schedules, desire to be around a hoard of people all day)

4. Super delegates or not

I support super delegates, but I am more flexible about this point that i am about other issues. I could easily see the rise of a Donald Trump like creature on the Democratic side. Economist populist but social conservative. I think SD's prevent the party from careening in weird directions, but as I said, I'm not too concerned about SD.

5. Winner take all or split delegates

[dlwickham]

1. closed primary split

I'm up in the air about super delegates; I don't see why party leaders shouldn't be in on selecting the candidate

convention delegates are usually every day people who would never have the chance to participate in something like this again in their lifetime

[La Lioness Priyanka]

2. how close to the primary should someone be able to switch allegiances?

[dlwickham]

10. I don't think there is one answer for that

In my little county there are less than 10k people and would take the clerks office no time at all to process voterregistration changes but in a larger county it could take mothree months to process everything and get all the voter lists together and let's not forget about people filling out registration forms incorrectly and having to get those sent back to the voter

I'm gonna go with 2 to 3 months before the election

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. Good point

[etherealtruth]

3. I am not AA, so don't read if you are solely interested in AA opinion

I apologize if I have intruded. This was a thought provoking OP that asked for opinions, rationales and conditions and I wanted to participate .... but do not want to intrude

1. Open vs Closed

I am torn on this. Part of me thinks no voter should have to "register" or publicly declare to "the government" their party affiliation The other part of me leans toward closed primaries; I realize primary raiding is a rather small issue but it is not inconsequential. Additionally, some comittment should be required to have a say in which candidate a party nominates and supports.

I am a 40/ 60 (open/ closed) split on this.

2. If you believe it should be closed, how soon to the date of a primary can you switch?

The switch should follow voter registration timelines (which should not close more than ten days before any vote)

3. Primary vs Caucus

In my mind caucuses disenfranchise large numbers of voters. I have yet to see a cogent argument for caucuses in the modern day.

4. Super delegates or not

I could do without super-delegates.

5. Winner take all or split delegates

Delegates should be "split" proportionately along the lines of the popular vote

[1StrongBlackMan]

15. Please know ... This Group is open to, and welcoming of, all peoples ...

that wish to discuss issues that affect the African-American community.

[etherealtruth]

16. I pop in every now and again and have always felt welcome

My only concern is that if the OP solely wanted to illicit opinion from the AA community ... I wasn't it.

Thanks

[LuvLoogie]

4. Closed primaries only; no caucuses; 3 months minimum, 6 months max...

proportional delegates; keep the supers. Same day registration allowed for the general only.

[brer cat]

5. Closed primaries,

registered by a month out, include supers, split delegates. I certainly don't think people who are not supporting a party in general should be allowed to have a say in the nominee. Of course, if people switch before the primary they will have a voice. Caucuses are very undemocratic. I would love to see them eliminated. I doubt that supers would often change the preference of the people, but in the event that a Trump-like candidate came close, they could close the door.

[BlueMTexpat]

22. You said it for me and likely

more concisely than I would have!

Full disclosure: I'm not AA, but LOVE the AA Group!

[romana]

6. My thoughts

1. A mix. It's not a bad idea, in some states, to allow open primaries as a way to gauge the cross-party and independent vote. The majority of primaries should be closed.

2. I think a month in advance is reasonable. In this day and age of social media and 24/7 news cycles, name recognition will have less and less of an impact.

3. Primary. Caucuses are inconvenient, unrepresentative, and undemocratic.

4. I'm fine with superdelegates. The party leaders have a right to exert some final control over their nominee.

5. Indifferent on this one. I kind of enjoy the delegate strategy game, and am fine with the way it is now.

Here's one for you? How long should a potential candidate be a member of a particular party before running for national office?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

7. Ask me that question in about two years

Right now by answer is too influenced by my fondness for Hillary

[romana]

8. Fair enough :)

I do think it's an interesting question, and worth asking. But yeah, probably too soon.

[Uponthegears]

9. Interesting question

Question One: Closed, but for different reasons. Political parties should serve the PEOPLE who are willing to vote for their candidates, NOT the vision of a set of masters (co-ops vs corporations).

Question Two: Thirty days BUT registration should be possible online, via identifiable telephone, by mail, at community centers, etc. In other words, it should require ZERO effort and ZERO time. Once registered, you stay registered until YOU change it. The party can remove NO ONE.

Question Three: Primary . . . The people involved at selection should look like the people involved at election.

Question Four: Ceremonial only, either no vote or so few that they can't change any thing more than a near 50-50 outcome. If the party becomes so divorced from the people that a rogue candidate can actually take hold, it's the PARTY that needs to change.

Question Five: Proportional, even though there is a certain logic in having the primaries semi-mirror the electoral process.

Let me throw out one other idea. Because the party's selection of a candidate is not a governmental function there arguably would be no free speech problems with party financed only campaigns.

[wildeyed]

12. We could do so much better.

1. Open, at least partially, particularly in light of the heavily gerrymandered districts. In many places, the only way to have a say is to vote in the party primary. I identify with the left coalition called the Democratic Party but lived in a heavily right coalition AKA Republican area for some years. So I registered as an independent and voted in the GOP primary occasionally. Since the GOP was going to win the GE, it was the only way to have a say in the election.

3. Primary, but with a ranked preference ballot. Pick your top three, in order of preference. If no candidate wins a simple majority on the first ballot, the lowest vote getter is kicked out, and the ballot recalculated with the new first choices in place. This continues until someone wins a simple majority. You get the best of both worlds. Regular primaries are more democratic because they allow more to participate, but the ranked choice is similar to a caucus.

4. Yes, superdelegates in a case of a contested convention or in situations where new information renders a candidate unelectable. That could have happened with John Edwards. But they should not overturn the popular vote except in a unique situation.

5. Winner takes all if we do the ranked preference voting. Or it could be proportional between the top two or three vote getters. Either works with ranked voting. But def split them if we do a regular ballot or caucus.

[pnwmom]

13. All mail-in primaries, like we voted for in WA -- but got rejected by the party. n/t

[Number23]

14. CLOSED with a capital freaking C. NY got that perfectly, not only closed but you had to change your

affiliation six months in advance to vote. That's exactly the way it should be done.

Primary and I'd do away with super delegates too. It's great that someone is a mover and shaker in the Dem party but their vote shouldn't carry more weight than anyone else's.

[lib87]

18. Co-sign Everything!

Popular vote aka most votes wins would be great to me. And much more simpler in a primary.

[Number23]

20. Actually, your point about the popular vote counting more than anything has been used by folks

interested in getting rid of the electoral college too. Bush beating Gore caused alot of people to do some serious soul searching over how we elect presidents in this country.

[Coolest Ranger]

17. A Primary where white voters

treat me with respect and don't dismiss me or treat me like a child

[JI7]

19. i think it's up to states, i can see places like New Hampshire being ok for open primaries

because the indies in the state still play a huge part in the major parties to have a role in it.

but i have a problem with many of those who are complaining now because the makeup of dem party is too black/brown in many states with closed primaries.

[JustAnotherGen]

21. Had to consider this carefully

Last edited Tue May 3, 2016, 08:05 AM - Edit history (1)

1. Closed.
2.National date 2 months prior to first primary date.
3.Primary - your vote should not be public.
4. No super delegates
5. Split delegates

Bonus Answer - The Primaries should start in April and end on May 31st.

The there should be nothing but Super Dates that run over two days -Friday and Saturday.
They should be by region. Makes its easier for the Politicians to pull in their campaigning.
Early and absentee should start the day after the registration close date.

Ending in May because many local governments - including mine vote on school board and budgets in May/June.

I think NH or IA should have to give up their special stays for the regional campaigns. So either we start in the Midwest and Include IL on that first day - or we start in New England and Include MA and CT on that first day.