Reform For The Nomination Process

Big Tent Democrat wrote on TalkLeft I am watching a C-Span broadcast about the broken, undemocratic, and corrupt nomination process. Elaine Kamarck of the DNC Rule and Bylaws Committee is going through the history and droning on about this and that. And it hit me. The solution to the problem is simple - we should change the Presidential nomination process to a pure popular vote system. This would end all the silly calendar nonsense. You want to go first? Be my guest. That is not going to change the fact that California has the most people.

And therefore just the large states would control everything. Candidates would not even campaign in small states.

This would also let states decide if they wanted to pay for a real election (a primary) or wanted instead to hold a phony election (a caucus).

And only the people that went to the caucus would be counted?

It gets rid of superdelegates. Heck, it gets rid of DELEGATES period. It gets rid of every unDemocratic feature in the process (no overweighting rural districts or urban districts or any district.) Finally, it eliminates the importance of incompetents like Donna Brazile. So there you have it. My proposed reform for the nomination process.

Predictably squeaky commented And while you are at it get rid of the electoral college. Popular vote wins.

Forget about that pesky Constitution. We don't really follow it that much anyway.

p lukasiak commented This is the kind of proposal that gave us McGovern back in 1972, BTD.

That is OK, we need more Republican Presidents anyway.

The idea is that if no candidate can garner support of 60% of the Democratic electorate, it should be up to the party professionals -- which makes perfect sense to me. I would get rid of caucuses -- Obama showed how to game the system, and destroyed the rationale for caucuses in the process (caucuses are designed to give PARTY activists a say,

But you just said if a candidate does not get 60% the party professionals should decide.

when a personality cult overwhelms the caucus system, it doesn't help the party on the local level.) As far as the calendar goes, "Red" states should be stuck at the back of the line.

That is very democratic.

But regardless of what happens, the single most important reform that has to happen is closed primaries -- unfortunately, some states don't register voters by party, so that will be a problem, but it should be DEMOCRATS who vote in the Democratic primary - and you should have to be a registered Democrat for at least six months before you can participate in the primary (unless you just turned 18). No more of the "Democrat for a day" BS....

What about independents.

1jpb commented I like the idea of mostly no scheduling for the primaries. But Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada should go first.

Why???

AnninCA commented I don't believe that the DNC has the authority to change how states conduct their election business.

Precisely, but that has never stopped Democrats before.

The way to encourage states to stop caucuses is to provide money through the DNC to fund alternative methods.

Typical Democrat. If you want to control something, just have some higher organization use money to control.

I like the mail in system for states that don't have the money for primaries. Seed the process. The states apply for the money. THAT I think the DNC could attract money from voters all over to fund. I don't like the 4 states up front. That really was the issue this year. Everyone is sick of Iowa, frankly. LOL* I personally like the idea of rotating early primary schedules. Let other states have a shot once in a blue moon.

I agree. You should start with a few small states, but different states each election.

I don't like the idea of all votes on 1 day. This year in particular we've gotten to vet Obama ONLY because it's been a long primary season. Otherwise, he'd have stormed right in, and we wouldn't have had a good idea of what he is really about.

We still don't know.

MarkL commented how often you can change your party registration? This "democrat for a day" business is not good, IMO. If people change their registration, make it stick. Also, allow independents, but not Republicans.

Can Independents vote in whichever primary they want? Or both?