Posted on 05/09/2016 9:13:59 AM PDT by rktman
Nevada is likely to lose its place as the first Western state to vote in the Republican presidential nomination contest, several GOP leaders tell POLITICO.
For three successive elections, the state has been grouped in the vaunted class of early-voting states, joining Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina as the bellwethers that garner the most attention from presidential candidates and help winnow voters’ choices. But for the third straight primary season, Nevada’s caucuses have been wracked by embarrassing procedural errors, low turnout, confusion among attendees and questions about the integrity of the process…
Republican National Committee members say there’s growing momentum behind an effort to strip Nevada of its early place in line — handing it instead to either Colorado or Arizona.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Fact is, all primaries should be held on one date. One and done.
Please don’t replace it with Utah whatever you do.
If voters are so ill informed that Carson is the nominee, then shame on us.
If either party wanted true "fairness", they would have a nationwide primary on the same day, with one-man, one vote. Forget the caucuses, and all the other shenanigans that can be manipulated.
It would also be an opportunity to implement the same uniform process in every state. Winner-take-all will give more power to the largest states, but something like "1 delegate for each win in a Congressional district, plus 2 delegates for the winner of a state" would be a reasonable compromise. This is how Maine and Nebraska allocate electoral college votes. If you want to scale it up to more delegates than 535, that's OK.
If there is a large field of candidates, voting for a single candidate can make it difficult for some people to make a choice. That can be solved by using "instant-runoff" voting.
Short version: you rank your candidates, #1, #2, #3, etc. until you have ranked all of the candidates, or exhausted your preferences.
In the first round of calculation, the votes for candidates specified as #1 on all ballots are counted. If one candidate receives a MAJORITY (not a plurality), they win the election.
If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate receiving the least #1 votes is eliminated. Then, those ballots specifying the eliminated candidate as #1 are recounted, using their #2 votes.
The process repeats as many times as necessary, eliminating the candidate with the lowest number of votes (and using the next candidate on those ballots, if any), until a candidate has a majority of votes.
The low turnout criticism is a canard.
Make early states move to a primary voting system or lose their place a the front of the pack.
Keep Nevada, dump the Iowa Ethanol Lobby Caucus
Please get rid of our caucus, give us back our primaries.
Poor turnout is because this is a 24/7 state, millions of people can’t vote in a two/three hour window in the middle of the week.
Poorly organized and confusing in my opinion is what the Nevada Republican Party was aiming for. Changing everyone’s precinct site, doubling and tripling precincts voting at one location, no mail outs, stating you had to be registered for the caucus, not registered to vote only but registered for the caucus also.
This year was particularly bad compared to our two previous so it had to be deliberate.
California hasn’t sent Republican Electors to the Electoral College since Reagan, or a Senator to DC since 1992, so why should the rest of us care what California Republicans think ??
Win some elections, get some say.
Primaries are spread out so candidates can make personal appearances in each of the states. This makes the primary season longer but also exposes candidates to public scrutiny. Sometimes it’s the unexpected moments that reveal a side of the candidate not scripted for public consumption.
Nevada needs to drop the caucus and let people vote in a primary election.
It also allows candidates to draw unnecessary blood. I firmly believe all states should have had the ability to vote on the 17 contenders.
Roger that. With ID required. That’s on the ballot this year also as a referendum. ID requirements, that is.
Agree. Party apparatchiks may not let it happen, but it’s supposed to be democracy at work. Let’s face it, party bosses, patrons, cronies, and nepotists would lose their perks, power, and privileges if they couldn’t fix outcomes. Can you imagine- “super delegates”! Talk about fixing an election. It’s what Democrats and demagogues do best though.
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.