The Presidential Primary system is broken

[fermicat]

....and I wish they would fix it!

My beef (and I've seen others mention it here) is that because the states have their primaries spread out over time, only a small subset of them have any real influence in choosing the candidate. By the time a lot of states vote, many of the candidates have dropped out. I expect that when Massachusetts holds its primary, less than half the original candidates will remain in the race. What if we wanted to vote for one of the drop-outs? Also, a poor or excellent result in a given state almost certainly has an effect on the voting choices of people who vote in later primaries. If a voter thinks their guy or gal has no chance at all because they didn't get many votes in another state, that voter might vote differently than they would if the partial results (from earlier primaries) were not available.

Since the presidential election is a nationwide, same-day vote, I think it would be a good idea if the primaries were all held in the same fashion. I strongly believe that the results would sometimes be different if the primaries were held in each state concurrently, and the results would better represent the will of the nation's voters as a whole. We would also get a preview of how well each candidate can manage a nationwide campaign.

Anyone care to discuss this? I don't see how the current system benefits anyone other than voters in the earliest states and the candidates who can appeal to those people. The rest of us are deprived of the opportunity to vote for some fine candidates.

[DRD2001]

I get to vote July 20th. Can you guess how I feel?

[ShawnaTums]

i know that one reason NH has made sure that they remain the first primary is that it is the only way that they would see ANY of the canidates at all......by being so far in front of everyone else - they actually get to see the canidates - while being such a small state - they would otherwise just get shorted and not really get ANYONE to care that they are voting.......and i think that is the reason for spreading them out - it allows the canidates to really get around to all the states and convince the populus that THEY should be the canidate - as for drop outs - remember that the primaries are not the same as the general election - remember how long they have to campaign.......these folks have alot less money and alot less time to convince thier ENTIRE party that they are the one to pit against the other party..........

i suppose part of it doesn't make sense - and you can't vote for someone who has dropped out......but what sense does it make that i put my vote two monthes ago towards domeone who decided to drop out? either way it feels a little betraying............

but that's just my .02

[stellar]

I can't vote for the candidate I wanted because the candidate I wanted is Wes Clark. He's dropping out today (if he hasn't already). Protracted primaries like these deplete the choices before the majority of the people have had a chance to speak because few can keep up the level of funding long enough if they're not being continually funded which is easiest with victory in early primaries.

If there were one super tuesday, the the voices of the nation could be heard on the whole of the field, not just on those who had the money to keep going. Kerry is the clear beneficiary of this primary season. Dean is the big loser (more before the yelp heard round the world than after).

If you do want to have early votes to measure the temperament of the people. Then make the three first states, California, Texas and New York, because they have the most delegates to give.

[Antrobus]

I think anyone who's unhappy with when their primary (or caucus) is held has to tackle it on a state level. The states have some amount of control (if not all) over this - I think.

For instance, Maine dropped it's presidential primary this year and returned to doing the presidential preference selecting in our caucus instead. This is the first time Maine has played an early role, at least since I've been able to vote.

The municipal caucuses are always held every two years at the beginning of Feb. and the town and county affairs are taken care of then. Later, Maine had its primary runoffs. But what they changed this year was that they threw the presidential preferance part into the municipal caucus.

I ran my town's caucus in 2002 and we had 8 people attend. This year, because of the presidential preference being held at the caucus, we had 61 participants.

Maine wanted to return to the caucus because they felt they were losing the kind of grass roots discussions that municipalities should be having when selecting their party's presidential choice.

At the caucus there was time for discussion and then there was bartering for delegates. It was an interesting thing to see play out. Our town sends 4 delegates to the Maine State Convention. As it broke down at the caucus we will be sending 2 delegates for Kerry, 1 for Dean and 1 for Kucinich. Each delegate gets an alternate and they must be gender specific and balanced.

What theMaine State Democratic Party ended up reporting to the media was the raw count of votes each candidate got and Kerry took the state, but that doesn't mean he got all of every towns delegates.

This will all play out again at the Maine State Convention at the end of May. So, the causus is more of a gauge as to how the candidates are lining up and really doesn't mean too much more than that until the municipal delegates get to the state convention.

After the State Convention, then Maine will take its 24 delegates
and go to the National Convention (in Boston this year). However, about 10 of the 24 delegates are made up of Democratic dignitaries such as Congressmen, the State Gov. etc.
And they are not beholden to anyone as to how they vote.

It's a long strange process and I can see how states with late primaries and caucuses feel cheated.

[BillFrugge]

"The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote." -- Kosh

[fermicat]

I may not vote in the MA primary. There doesn't seem to be much point in it now.

I won't miss the election, however (and I will be voting in Georgia in November).

[Antrobus]

I won't miss the election, however (and I will be voting in Georgia in November).

Going back to the south?

[fermicat]

Originally posted by Antrobus
Going back to the south?

HELL YEAH!!!

Can't wait. No more New England winters for me (after this one, of course).

[fermicat]

Looks like a lot of people are unhappy with their lack of any real voice in the primary process, and Wisconsin is a place where there is still fierce competition among the remaining candidates....

From www.boston.com:

Wisconsinites wonder whether their votes matter
By Raja Mishra and Glen Johnson, Globe Staff, 2/13/2004

MILWAUKEE -- As they campaign in Wisconsin, former Vermont governor Howard Dean insists the state's voters will have a voice in picking the Democratic nominee and Senator John Edwards of North Carolina urges locals to halt the "coronation" of Senator John F. Kerry.

But Geri Smith, 55, of Racine, has deep doubts about how much of a difference she and other Democrats who have not yet voted can make. Kerry's recent electoral steamrolling makes his nomination virtually certain, she says, and her vote largely inconsequential.

"Iowa, New Hampshire, their votes mattered more," said Smith. "It certainly takes some of the fun out of it."

Kerry has not yet secured the nomination, and competition for votes here has been vigorous in recent days, with Edwards and Dean both hoping for strong showings. But Kerry's string of victories in the 3 1/2-week-old primary season looms large. Dozens of potential Wisconsin voters interviewed over the last week have said they think his nomination is inevitable, dampening their enthusiasm for voting. Some have questioned the fairness of the primary process and its domination this year by Iowa and New Hampshire, which set Kerry on his way.

And voter discontent could spread beyond this state: Upcoming votes in Florida, California, New York, and dozens of other states already seem somewhat superfluous given Kerry's recent electoral dominance.

The Democratic Party deliberately scheduled a fast sequence of primaries between mid-January and March. The goal was to settle quickly on a nominee, leaving the spring and summer to raise funds and set strategy for the fall challenge to President Bush. But critics of the process have said the schedule leaves too little time to consider the candidates. Kerry's Iowa and New Hampshire wins, they say, dominated the news, giving him, in one short week, insurmountable momentum.

That's not a problem to Kerry partisans, of course, or to Democrats who simply want the most electable candidate.

"Some people say it's too bad that Iowa and New Hampshire made the decision. But I think Kerry is a good candidate," said Terry Lynch, 65, of Racine. "Let's just get behind him and push forward. It's more important to get Bush out of office."

The Edwards and Dean campaigns privately worry that Kerry's aura of inevitability will guarantee his win here on Tuesday. Both see strong finishes in Wisconsin as crucial to their campaigns.

For the past week, Dean has tried to stoke any fear Wisconsinites may have about being marginalized, warning that journalists are trying to end the race before the public has a chance to have its say at the ballot box.

"Over the next few days, the power to make this country great again is in your hands," he said yesterday before a crowd at the Grand Opera House in Oshkosh. "The media would like to end this candidacy. . . . They say your voice doesn't matter, they say your vote doesn't count, they expect you to rubberstamp the choice of others."

Dropping his voice, he concluded: "You don't have to listen to them."

Both Dean and Edwards are counting on Wisconsin's reputation for favoring mavericks. Indeed, studies of the electorate here have shown voters tend to base their election decisions on the issues, a habit political scientists call "sincere voting."

At least that's how Wisconsin used to be. John McAdams, a professor of political science at Marquette University, says the state's reputation for political sincerity is "overblown."

"Wisconsin is much less distinctive than people have said. Its independence has long been exaggerated," he said. "The bottom line is that Wisconsin is like most other states."

McAdams said the aura of inevitability around Kerry could affect voter turnout. "A lot of people may stay home. It's the logical response to that perception," he said.

Nevertheless, Edwards has been campaigning hard here -- and Dean, once the leader in Wisconsin polls, remains popular in the crucial urban areas of Madison and Milwaukee.

"If there is enough of a perception of a race, then turnout will be decent," said McAdams.

Laurie Luepke, a registered nurse from Oshkosh, took her 15-year-old daughter Margaret out of high school to watch Dean's morning speech yesterday.

"I think there is an energy, and I do feel that the primary is important," she said. But Luepke expressed concern about the front-loaded primary calendar, saying, "It seems to start up so quickly and then people lose interest because they make up their minds so quickly."

Margaret Manley, 43, of Racine, also expressed frustration with the process just minutes before Edwards spoke at a Racine community center yesterday.

"What's the sense in having a right to vote? . . . It's still a campaign, I hope," she said. "I hope people don't vote for Kerry because it looks like a landslide. That's lame."

Edwards, in almost every speech here, has insisted to those gathered that the nomination process remains "a campaign, not a coronation." But privately, aides say, he is frustrated that Kerry's recent victories have overshadowed his candidacy. Edwards staff members say they think his chances will be bolstered by the fact that he has a full week to campaign here before the vote, a luxury not available since the New Hampshire primary. Most voting days since Jan. 27 have involved multiple states, forcing candidates to split their time and money.

Daisy Fosco, 83, of Kenosha, said despite Kerry's lead, she will cast her vote for Edwards.

"I think every vote counts," she said. "I don't know how other people feel. I'm going to vote for what my heart says."

And young Brandon Actkins, 18, of Racine, defended the importance of his first vote: "It's not over until all the votes are counted."