Reply #4: I see some problems.

[LWolf]

How about this:

In the primary, each candidate gets 10 million dollars from public funds, and not a penny more than that can be spent, including by outside groups.

All polling will be illegal.

The primary lasts 6 months, and it doesn't matter who goes first. It doesn't matter because all voting will be done by mail, and there will be ONE vote counting date after the last primary. No ballot is opened before that day, ample time is provided to conduct an ethical, accurate vote, and no vote counts are announced until the last count is official. Then they are all announced at the same time.

There are ample, abundant debates. In these debates, questions are constructed by citizen groups, not media heads, moderators are pulled from local citizen or democratic groups, and every candidate is asked every question, and given an equal amount of time to respond. No one candidate gets more talking time, or different questions, than another. Perhaps each of the debates could be centered on only one issue, to allow for a more substantive discussion of each issue.

In the general election, each candidate can again have $10 million, again from public coffers with no private donations allowed, and not a penny more.

Again, all polling will be illegal.

Again, multiple debates based on the above format, to include all 3rd party and independent candidates as well as the R and D.

Again, all ballots will be mailed in, and the count will start at the same time, as above. Again, no results will be announced until the last ballot is verified and counted, and all official counts are done.

For the primaries, the GE, and every other damned day of every year: a fairness doctrine that keeps mass media neutral.

The only real question here is this:

What is the most effective process of narrowing the candidates who can qualify to be on the primary ballot down, without allowing outside money into the process?