Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RNC Adopts New 2012 Presidential Primary Schedule
The Washington Post ^ | 6 August 2010 | Rosalind S. Helderman

Posted on 08/06/2010 4:15:20 PM PDT by The Pack Knight

KANSAS CITY, MO. -- The Republican National Committee adopted a new schedule for the 2012 presidential primaries Friday, agreeing to a plan worked out in concert with Democrats and designed to delay the start of the campaign season.

The proposal, drafted by a special RNC panel, gained approval from more than the necessary two-thirds of the committee's 168 members.

Party leaders hailed the vote as a historic change in the presidential selection process, one that would avoid the development of a single national primary in which states choose to hold their nominating contests on the same day.

The new schedule is designed to make it difficult for a candidate to rack up an insurmountable number of delegates early in the process, forcing candidates to campaign across the country.

Under the new schedule, no state would hold a primary or caucus before the first Tuesday in February 2012, in attempt to avoid a repetition of 2008, when the Iowa caucuses were held Jan. 3.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012election; 2012primary; election2012; rnc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
This basically codifies Iowa's, New Hampshire's, South Carolina's, and Nevada's as the first primaries/caucuses.

The other big rule is that other primaries can only be held in March if delegates are awarded proportionally; winner-take-all primaries must be held in April or later.

I'm still trying to figure out what this will mean other than the fact that it will hopefully bring a bit of sanity back to the schedule.

1 posted on 08/06/2010 4:15:24 PM PDT by The Pack Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

What are the arguments for an all-in-one-day primary election nationwide?


2 posted on 08/06/2010 4:17:29 PM PDT by Engineer_Soldier (Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC.org))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

are they starting with LIndsay’s home state...RNC better get their act together...Kagan approval tells me they wont..we have two on the court now or is it 3..so its already tilted.


3 posted on 08/06/2010 4:25:57 PM PDT by dalebert ( an)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

It maybe helps people like Sarah...because you have to have a grassroots effort to win instead of just massive TV ads... Mitt’s style, from my understanding of it

There will be no knock out punch for candidates, but long protracted process


4 posted on 08/06/2010 4:26:15 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Engineer_Soldier
What are the arguments for an all-in-one-day primary election nationwide?

Those of us on the bottom of the voting list, according to state, don't get a full ballot - and it sucks.

5 posted on 08/06/2010 4:54:30 PM PDT by Libloather (Teapublican, PROUD birther, mobster, pro-lifer, anti-warmer, enemy of the state, extremist....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Engineer_Soldier

I think the big argument is that the later primaries are essentially rendered moot, denying voters in those states any real say in the nomination process.

I know that was the case with my vote in North Carolina - McCain had already clinched the nomination, and the only four names on the ballot were McCain, Keyes, Huckabee, and Paul. Of course, the N.C. primary was very important on the Democrat side, which shows that staggered primaries can sometimes enhance the importance of later primaries.


6 posted on 08/06/2010 4:54:41 PM PDT by The Pack Knight (Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike; Al B.; Clyde5445

Correct. Grassroots campaigns, and primaries will matter in red states where Republicans are more conservative.

No more locking-up the nomination by winning in big blue states or blue states in the northeast, where Republicans are not conservatives.

I think the changes will definitely benefit Sarah, should she decide to run. Mitt’s money can buy a lot of TV ads, but it’ll come down to getting out the vote and I don’t expect Sarah will be all that short of money either.


7 posted on 08/06/2010 4:57:16 PM PDT by onyx (Sarah/Michele 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

This would definitely stretch the process out more. Last year, the Republican contest was decided on Super Tuesday, the second week of Feburary. If this goes through, many states will have to select new primary election days since so many were bunched in February in 2008.

But as long as there are no runoffs in the state primaries, we can always get a result with several conservatives splitting the conservative vote, allowing some RINO to have the most votes in a given state, in a state where if a runoff were held, the top conservative would handily defeat the RINO in a one-on-one contest.


8 posted on 08/06/2010 4:59:29 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx; All
There's an important caveat at the end of the article which was not included in the excerpt:

"The new schedule will go into effect only if the Democratic National Committee adopts similar primary rules before the end of the year."

Also, state governments might have something to say about this and could cause another mess like they did in 2008, with the DNC refusing to seat delegates from Michigan because its primary violated DNC rules by being held too early. We may not have heard the last word.
9 posted on 08/06/2010 5:00:42 PM PDT by The Pack Knight (Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

This was thrown in the hopper to protect Duncan Hunter or someone like him with a clear, differentiated message. We want to give them a chance to catch fire or at least have an impact on the national message. The main beneficiary now, of course, would be Governor Palin.


10 posted on 08/06/2010 5:01:13 PM PDT by MARTIAL MONK (I'm waiting for the POP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Will88
But as long as there are no runoffs in the state primaries, we can always get a result with several conservatives splitting the conservative vote, allowing some RINO to have the most votes in a given state, in a state where if a runoff were held, the top conservative would handily defeat the RINO in a one-on-one contest.

I absolutely agree with that. These plurality, winner-take-all primaries are killing us.

It will be interesting to see if any states switch to a proportional-award primary in order to hold theirs earlier.
11 posted on 08/06/2010 5:02:44 PM PDT by The Pack Knight (Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

Oh gosh, than you for *that*. I’m sure we haven’t heard the last word...lol.

I didn’t click to the article, having read about the changes at C4P.


12 posted on 08/06/2010 5:02:54 PM PDT by onyx (Sarah/Michele 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

The system sucks.

Why the hell does Iowa go first?


13 posted on 08/06/2010 5:03:00 PM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

I think the RNC needs to close all open primaries too. No more registered Dimbocrats voting in our primaries.


14 posted on 08/06/2010 5:03:52 PM PDT by Engineer_Soldier (Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC.org))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

It matters little what the schedule is when conservative Republicans are willing to accept a process in which liberals get to decide who their nominee for President will be.

It’s one of the stupidest things ever foisted on a gullible public, frankly.


15 posted on 08/06/2010 5:04:17 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (They say money is the mother's milk of politics, but it's not. It's one hundred proof corn liquor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight
...agreeing to a plan worked out in concert with Democrats - is that the schedule or the result?
16 posted on 08/06/2010 5:05:39 PM PDT by Free_at_last_-2001 (A country can survive its fools, but it cannot survive treason from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
liberals get to decide who their nominee for President will be.

Voters decide the nominee(s)

...and that will not be the candidate from your wee Party.

17 posted on 08/06/2010 5:25:02 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jla

You don’t have any problem with a party nominating process that includes those who stand against the party’s platform, eh?


18 posted on 08/06/2010 5:26:44 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (They say money is the mother's milk of politics, but it's not. It's one hundred proof corn liquor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight
If they haven't gotten rid of the "open primaries", we are still screwed!

Why let Democrats vote in our elections and pick whom they are going to run against?

19 posted on 08/06/2010 5:26:58 PM PDT by Gritty (Never bet against Republicans being outwitted - Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Engineer_Soldier

“I think the RNC needs to close all open primaries too. No more registered Dimbocrats voting in our primaries”

I totally agree with you. I however, believe the RINOS will never go for closed primaries. This is one reason, I refuse to call myself a Republican or give to the RNC.


20 posted on 08/06/2010 5:38:39 PM PDT by texteacher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson