I do hope the Democratic Party acknowledges the current primary process is almost entirely

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

responsible for the divisive shit show. And for what? Tradition, i.e., Iowa and NH and Super Tuesday?

As much as Tweety might wish, we are not the M$M Party. And feeding pollsters and pundits at the trough should no longer be acceptable.

The fix is easy.

57 piecemeal elections over the course of 5 months lends itself to shenanigans. Everyone scoreboard watches. Often you'll hear people say, I support X, but they are so far behind I'll vote for Y. Pollsters and pundits are calling the election 2 months into a 5 month process, discouraging many and angering the rest. And why can't states that hold primaries in late May or June vote? People are furious at the notion they should be allowed to vote.

We've allowed ourselves to become the tools of every industry that sucks the blood of this sacred process like vampires. I mean, who the fuck is Nate Silver? I sure don't need to know and he deserves needs to return to his well paying job in complete anonymity.

Too much money, and many are saying it needs to be spent on the GE now.

Superdelegates can go. Open vs closed is debatable. We learned from California that people who were registering with the Indepenence Party didn't know they were getting locked out of the process. Sounds like that was the case in NY, too (they were going for Independent). Voting is hard. I'm in an open primary state and have learned a lot about the lengths the Democratic Party goes to make it a bloody farce.

Just adopting the GE process, say, every primary is held on the same day in late May, would wipe out almost all of this and, boom! it's over! No more arguing about when it should be over. No more scoreboard watching. It will reduce the shenanigans.

This would go a long way in remedying the process. And it's simple.

[MineralMan]

1. A single date primary in all states would instantly

eliminate any candidate like Sanders. He didn't have the money to run that kind of primary race. Our primaries stretched over months are designed to let candidates without massive funding actually participate.

Be careful about what you ask for. The results might well not turn out as you think.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

3. No. Fund raising isn't the boogie man anymore. Don't know what you were watching in 2008 and 2016

[Dem2]

7. Excellent point

There are no easy fixes to the system we have, just a lot of complaints from those who don't fare as well.

[-none]

2. The obvious fix is the last to be tried.

You are correct. It is the way it is for a reason. Control. It is easier to fix a few swing states than to fix the entire nation to "win" elections.
Not only have the primaries on the same day for all political parties, but get rid of the delegates too. The Super Delegates should never have come into existence. Their sole purpose is to throw the election to the pre-chosen winner when the people choose wrong.

[Hiraeth]

4. Nope, not happening. It has been decided that a lot of Americans are delusional.

That is the tactic. Call a lot of Americans crazy and keep on trucking.

[uponit7771]

5. again how did Obama win with similar system and being black and having less PDs and little support..

... from the beginning?

tia

[DesMoinesDem]

6. If you want to have every primary on the same day there is no reason to even vote.

Just give the nomination to the person with the highest name recognition and most money. There is a reason why the primaries start with small states one at a time. It's so people without money and national name recognition can make their case to the people in the state. This is how Jimmy Carter won the nomination. He wouldn't have had a chance if it was all on the same day. You think too much money is spent on the primaries now? That is nothing compared to what would need to be spent for every candidate to run a national campaign.