WP: Democrats Consider Changes in Primaries

[Pirate Smile]

Democrats Consider Changes in Primaries

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 9, 2005; Page A13

Democratic presidential candidates will face a revised calendar of primaries and caucuses in 2008, including new contests between the traditional opening states of Iowa and New Hampshire, based on new recommendations that will be considered by a Democratic National Committee panel tomorrow.

The commission faces a weekend deadline to approve a plan that responds to party criticisms that Iowa and New Hampshire have enjoyed their privileged positions for too long and that more demographic, geographic and economic diversity are needed to make the nominating process more representative.


A staff draft of the final report, which will be forwarded to DNC Chairman Howard Dean, began circulating yesterday. It appeared to be a compromise between proposals pushed by Southern and Western states for two to four contests between Iowa and New Hampshire and a proposal from protesting New Hampshire Democrats for additional contests immediately after the Granite State's primary.

The draft contains four principal recommendations, according to Democrats briefed on the plan, but the most significant calls for the addition of one or two caucuses during the eight-day gap between the Iowa and New Hampshire events and one or two primaries in the period after the New Hampshire primary and the date that formally opens the nominating process to other states.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/08/AR2005120802066.html

[mitchtv]

1. TOOOOOOOOOO Long

I doubt much will happen

[Pithy Cherub]

2. A disruption of the status quo would be very welcome!

It would go a tremendous way to ensure that more candidates get a fair hearing and a more diverse voting populace than the standard two first states.

C'mon Howard, this is really a chance to lead and level the playing field! :woohoo:

[thatsrightimirish]

3. Well it's obvious

We lose most of the Presidential Elections

And of course its not all Iowa and New Hampshire's fault, but they both went for Kerry and as a result almost every other primary did. I think a Western and a Southern state will be good for Democrats because then the 1st primaries are all over the country and everyone can feel involved, not just apart of a domino affect started by Iowa and New Hampshire.

[Arkana]

27. Iowa ultimately went Turd in 2004...

[mzmolly]

4. I hope they mix it up, we need some diversity.

:)

[DaveColorado]

5. Nevanda and Virginia would be good

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

6. Dean got fucked-over in Iowa and exacts his revenge!

Bwa-ha-ha! :evilgrin:


I understand that holding primaries in swing and conservative states gives one a feel for how candidates will do with the opposing party...BUT...one tends to to end up with (duh) more conservative candidates.

Hold the first primary in California, NY, Washington or Massachusetts and you'll get true Blue.

[Skink]

7. Put Super Tuesday first.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

9. All at once?

The machine will fail and the people will win.

[One_Life_To_Give]

11. Then DLC would pick?

If it's all at once. I think the power brokers in the DLC will determine who the candidate will be. They have significant influence in how the large campaign contributions flow.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

21. Much harder to rig though.

When your campaign is based on $20 contributions one can thumb their nose at the DLC.

[One_Life_To_Give]

26. How much can be raised that way though?

I don't think you couold wage a 50 state primary on less than 50 million.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

28. You'd have to stick with the ten largest states.

Which have 75% of the population.

[trogdor]

16. National primary day is the way to go.

No caucuses, no independents, and NO REPUBLICANS. No friggin' way we would have gotten this generation's answer to Adlai Stevenson if everybody voted at once.

[Pirate Smile]

12. It will still go Iowa, then probably two more caucuses - one Western

state and one Southern state - then the New Hampshire primary. NH is the wild card right now. They are threatening to move up their date on their own.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

22. Which Western state?

Big difference between Cali or Washington and say Nevada or Arizona.

[Strawman]

8. Good

I hope it passes.

[Polemonium]

10. We all deserve a voice, nationwide one primary date

Democrats win if more people are engaged in politics. More people engaged if you give them a reason to be.

"I'm tired of having my vote not count for anything." I've heard that way too many times.

[kevsand]

14. Only billionaires need apply. /nt

[trogdor]

17. Which would be different from the status quo how?

[kevsand]

19. No Kucinich. No Clark. Hello Hillary. /nt

[shugah]

13. about damn time!

i hope they create or at least attempt to create something more effective than what we have now. i'm not sure that adding caucauses between NH and IA is the answer but at least they are finally talking about change!

[kevsand]

15. This may make the front-loading worse.

The plan drew some favorable comments but a negative reaction from New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Kathy Sullivan, who said it will result in too many contests too early in 2008. "It takes the worst of 2004 and exacerbates it," she said.

I think she may be right. It used to be that there were no clear front-runners until spring or summer. The last couple go-rounds, however, our nominee was decided by February and then went into a coma until the convention (which will probably be a full month later next time).

[MaineDem]

18. I think front loading is a bad idea

I'd like to see a plan that leaves Iowa and NH first but then add some smaller diverse states following them.

Then combine states balancing out the delegate count available on any given day. If Maine were paired with a CA or NY or even MA, we'd never see a candidate or have any money spent in our state at all. But if each state having a primary/caucus on Day X had roughly the same delegate numbers available it would mean the campaigns had to do some work in each of those states. Then the larger delegate-rich states could be alone on their given days.

[RaulGroom]

20. I agree, I think front loading is the problem, not the solution

The more you front-load and nationalize the primaries, the more influence big money and corporate media will exert on the primary. Definitely NOT what the party needs.

[thatsrightimirish]

23. the states

the western state should be Nevada because it is the fastest growing and the closest to turning blue. The Southern state should be Mississippi because I think it has a large black population and that should be represented.

[Codeine]

24. California should be first or second.

I've never understood why a bunch of podunk states get to make decisions before any of the states that actually matter.

[MaineDem]

25. Gee thanks

:eyes:

Sincerely,
Someone from a podunk state.

[IndianaGreen]

29. We are watching the C-SPAN coverage right now!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2303469