Posted on 11/05/2008 11:44:10 AM PST by Brookhaven
The problem is not primaries, it’s the manner and timing in which they are held that pretty much eliminates newer, less well known players getting into the game.
Instead we should divide it up into 5 primary dates comprised of roughly 10 regionally contiguous states which allows for candidates 1 month to campaign in those 10 states
Feb-June and choose the order of dates/regions by lot.
Part of the problem is the Boomer generation, once control of the GOP is wrested away from their cold dead fingers. But as long as the Rino/Entitlement generation outvotes the rest of us........ we’re stuck.
You are correct the rules on who can vote in a party's primary should be changed, but that also will be difficult. In Arizona independants can vote in the primary of their choice, that foolishnes was forced on us by ignorant voters through initiative, which can only be changed by another initiative.
“caucuses gave us Obama over Hitlery.”
It also gave the Democrats the candidate that was more in tune with their core beliefs. Obama (the far left wing socialist.)
“all things considered we would have been better with Hitlerly. Might have even been able to beat Hitlery in the general...”
The purpose of the system isn’t to nominate the candidate that is easiest for the other party to beat (although it sure seems like the Republican system is rigged to do just that.)
“caucuses are anti-individual. It goes against conservatism and the rugged individualism that built this country.”
Primaries are anti-first amendment (right of association). They force political parties to allow non-members to choose their nominee. Would you favor forcing churches to allow non-church members to choose their next pastor? Of course not, but somehow allowing non-party members (and even members of the other party) to chose a party’s nominee makes sense?
Agreed.
No, the problem is eliminating OPEN nominating processes. The early primaries were “Open” primaries, allowing non-Republicans to vote in them.
The RNC needs to put forth a rule: The Republican Nominating Process is a contest of Republicans, for Republicans. You must be a registered Republican in order to participate.
1. Close the primaries
2. Start the primaries in states in order of degree of McCain’s win to the worst loss.
E.g., start in Kentucky, Texas, etc.
Iowa can go f—k itself.
And why the Republicans scheduled primaries on different days than the Democratic primaries—I don’t get it. Why allow a perfect opportunity for the Dems to pick our person? We don’t cross over as much as they do—we’re too honorable to vote in a primary not our own. We are so dumb.
Actually, the problem isn’t primaries. The problem is that so many early primaries allowed open voting, that is, democrats and independents to vote for the Republican nominee. That allowed the Dems to engage in their own minor version of “Operation Chaos” and independents to vote for their (then) beloved maverick.
Primaries are much better than caucuses but the primaries MUST be closed.
States like GA have no party registration. You simply walk up to the voting desk and ask for a Democratic or Republican ballot.
I doubt you could get a state like GA to start registering people by party, much less requiring you to be a member of one before voting.
I’m on board with ending the open primaries. Here is another thought. Why can’t Republicans change their primaries in order of the states that had the highest Republican % in the last Presidential election?
Logistical problems I’m sure maybe legal ramifications as well. But I’m tired of VERY liberal states like Michigan, New Hampshire and Iowa having so much influence on our Republican candidate selection.
The primaries in very red Texas and other red states were meaningless when it came our turn to vote.
Senator Stevens(R) needs to resign his seat so that Sarah can run for the Senate.
Then there’s no way to prevent Democrats from wrecking the nomination process in Ga but other states require registering as R, D or I.
That's a very good idea, with a closed primary.
There may be issues with the other parties on changing dates, but the states do have the right to decide the date of their primary.
Anyone see problems with this?
1: Only allow registered republicans to vote in our primaries.
2: Don't let Iowa and then New Hampshire to get all the attention. Schedule 10 or so primaries 5 times so that no one state gets all the attention.
The solution to the primary system is to hold every state’s primary on the same day. Make the candidates campaign like they will for the general election.
I made a similar point earlier. The states that hold primaries/caucasus early...IA, NH, tend to want a RINO. To heck with them. Let the most conservative states hold them first. Why give an advantage to a RINO loving/DIM VOTING state?
1 man 1 vote.
we need to have secret ballots....I don’t need someone telling me how to vote. some trys to tell me how to vote I might have to re-arrange their faces.
also these things may work in flyover country where you have a minimum of people at play...it does not work where millions of people live in tight quarters.
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.