If you ran the DNC...

[ColbertWatcher]

...how would you run the primaries?

What would you do differently, the same?

[anonymous171]

1. Eliminate SDs

[derby378]

2. Shorter primary season, no "Super Tuesday"

The aim would be to avoid disenfranchisement of as many states as possible.

[dlfuller]

3. What ^ he said, plus force ALL primaries on the same day

[Ned_Devine]

10. I always liked that idea as well

I thought that if the candidates were allowed to campaign for x amount of months across the country in every state they can, they could have one massive primary day like a national holiday. The end results would show how well each candidate performed/campaigned putting out his/her messages in each state

[anonymous171]

11. Yeah. It would be good practice for the GE.

[Fresh_Start]

4. Rotate the primary schedule so that over time every state

can be early primary state and enjoy the wealth from that...
Collapse the primary schedule.
Maybe do primaries regionally so that the candidates can readily meet/greet people within the collapsed primary schedule.

Standardize the primary process.
No two step processes.

Closed primaries.

Eliminate superdelegates.

Other than that its wonderful.

[The Magistrate]

5. Very Simple, Sir: No Caucuses, All Primaries Winner Take All

Intra-party fights must be kept short if they are to end sweet....

[The Magistrate]

6. Very Simple, Sir: No Caucuses, All Primaries Winner Take All

Intra-party fights must be kept short if they are to end sweet....

[sandnsea]

13. So shorten the primary timetable

There's no reason to make states winner take all, that's unfair to smaller states. There's also nothing terribly wrong with caucuses. Maybe they could do two on an election day to give more people a chance to participate.

[The Magistrate]

16. 'Fairness' To Small States, Ma'am, Is Low On My List Of Concerns

The Federal electoral system and legislature are greatly unfair to large states, in which the majority of our people, and the majority of Democratic voters, reside.

Caucuses are grotesque exercises in cherry-picking that grossly inflate the influence of small claques, and disenfranchise ordinary voters. In the proverbial 'smoke filled room', at least this is done by professionals who know the business, and have some real stake in the outcome.

[sandnsea]

19. Fairness to small states keeps this a union

You eliminate the voice of the people in the small states, and watch how fast this country falls apart.

[The Magistrate]

20. Nonesense, Ma'am

The over-valuing of votes in small states, both in the electoral college and the Senate, and in the mechanisms for Constitutional amendment, is a disgrace of long standing. Where a sixth of the populace can balk the will of the rest, it is quite a stretch to speak of democracy and political equality among citizens of our nation.

[sandnsea]

21. Oh wow, I'm really surprised

What do you think causes riots? The voice of the people not being heard. The electoral college is what has given people in every state the sense that they have a stake in this country too. You eliminate that, just tell the people in all those small states that they're less important than they already feel, then what reason do they have to be loyal? I personally think hoardes of people in big cities aren't relevant because it's like a bunch of ants scurrying around, without a lot of differentiation between them. Why are they more important?

[The Magistrate]

22. No Individual Among Them, Ma'am, Is More Important

But there are a great many more individuals in cities. The question raised by your comment is why people in small states would feel attachment to the country only if they are considered as worth more politically than people in large states are. Your closing comment strikes me somewhat odd on other grounds. People in cities are, in fact, more various than people in rural communities, and that by far. It is not possible for me to get through an ordinary day in Chicago without rubbing up against people whose backgrounds and ways are very different from my own, and in consequence, city dwellers necessarily develop habits of tolerance and familiarity with the nominally strange. It is no accident cities tend to be strongholds of the Democratic Party, and rural communities of the Republicans, for the appeal of the latter party is largely based on rejection of 'the other' in some form, while the appeal of left and progressive movements is solidarity among people of all sorts, in recognition of common humanity. The root of these disfiguring elements in our polity is the old eighteenth century bromide that country gentlemen were the repositories of virtue, both civic and personal, while cities were centers of depravity and vice, whose denizens ought to have little if any participation in a nation's affairs. This was no more true in Mr. Jefferson's day than it is in ours: if anything, it is the reverse of it that accurately describes the case --- the arts and practices of civilization flow out from the streets, not in from the fields.

[sandnsea]

24. Well we just disagree on that

And there are many different kinds of people in rural America too. On any given day I can rub up against Native Americans, Latinos, African Americans, Indians, and even -- oh my god -- people from foreign countries.

The needs of people in rural communities are different than cities, we see it all the time. People are left behind and left out. If we didn't have two senators per state, some people would never be heard. I don't see where 10,000 people who are exactly alike, and have all that a city offers available to them - becomes more important than 1,000 people in a rural town who have to travel 100 miles to see a doctor, on a one lane dirt road, because somebody in DC didn't see fit to give them enough money for a clinic.

[DJ13]

7. Add bonus pledged delegates to the winner of each state

We need enough pledged delegates to support a two person race.

Adding bonus pledged delegates to the winner of each state would ensure that.

It would also penalize any candidate that felt she (or he) could win by only concentrating on the biggest states.

Doing that it doesnt matter if there are still super delegates because a candidate can win based solely on winning the most states.

[BlooInBloo]

8. I'm ok with it as is. Establishment is well-represented, and underdogs...

... apparently have plenty of opportunity to come outta nowhere and win. So I'm ok with it.

[Fresh_Start]

9. Make each individual vote worth exactly the same

doesn't matter if its a large state or small state, urban v rural, ordinary voter or superdelegate. One person=one vote all equal.

[sandnsea]

12. Shorten the timetable, no super tuesday, no superdelegates

I don't have a problem with caucuses because I think they're good for states like Nebraska, where a lot of people didn't know there were so many Democrats until they had a caucus. It's uplifting to see those faces. I also don't have a problem with proportional voting because I know the racism behind the way districts have been historically drawn and that weighting them is the way to even it out.

I find it funny that people want winner take all in the primary, but had a fit when California wanted to split its electoral votes.

People need to learn to think beyond the week that's sitting in front of them.

[NC_Nurse]

14. No shit. There are reasons for the way this is set up. How soon we forget.

[Growler]

17. I like your plan

and can't improve on it. I don't _like caucuses, but too many people do to just eliminate them.

[Aloha Spirit]

15. That's a big IF, but ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW55FRXlPEs

[Aloha Spirit]

18. Fine, a serious response: I'm kinda into the regional primaries notion as laid out in February. n/t

[LisaM]

23. No more caucuses, number one.

Make sure people who have to work get to vote.

Bundle more primaries together (I don't agree with the all-on-one-day model - there's got to be some weeding out process).

Make sure that no state gets disenfranchised for wanting its voice to be heard.

See which states are in bad straits, and give them a preference to have an earlier primary, instead of letting the rich states call all the shots.

Fix the money discrepancy so people like JE would have a better chance.

[LTR]

25. Battle Royale cage match

Okay, how about a small series of Super Tuesdays, rotated among the states to give them the chance to vote earlier. Primary season should end by early April at the latest (and that's being generous). Iowa and New Hampshire can still be first, in the interest of tradition. After that, they're clustered, perhaps six dates with 8-9 states/territories participating in each.

Minimize the importance of superdelegates. I understand the DNC still wants them, as an equalizer of sorts and to maintain some control over the process. But there shouldn't be so many. And no winner-take-all primaries. Divvy them up proportionally.

Caucuses are fine. I think they do play a part in the process, as they inspire the grassroots of the party.

And finally, if a state (or two) loses their delegates due to wrongdoing, at least lower the magic nomination number to correspond with it. At least make it attainable without being the only one in the race.

[donheld]

26. Ultimate Fighting Champion!

[crankychatter]

27. start later-stop sooner-but keep the fifty state strategy... it's actually beautiful

and long overdue

[Hippo_Tron]

28. One national primary day, all candidates have the same amount of money to spend

Majority of the national popular vote gets the nomination. Runoff a week later if necessary with a debate between the two remaining candidates where they actually get to ask each other questions instead of the bullshit debates that we have now.

[ColbertWatcher]

30. Agreed.

The way debates are held are ridiculous.

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't our State of The Union originally supposed to be like Question Period for the Prime Minister?

[Hippo_Tron]

32. No, the State of the Union is in the constitution

But it isn't required that the President actually go and speak to congress, and it isn't required annually. The constitution just says "from time to time". Until Woodrow Wilson, Presidents would just deliver the State of the Union in writing. It became a bigger deal with the invention of radio and TV because it gave the President a chance to speak to the entire nation, not just congress.

Bush wouldn't be electable in a country where the legislature gets to question the chief executive.

[ColbertWatcher]

35. But, wasn't the whole idea based...

...on the Question Period. Our American interpretation.

So as not to be too much like the monarchy...

[crankychatter]

29. 9 month time frame with equidistant multilple Super Tuesdays

and once per month debates including ALL candidates

publicly funded and run by League of Women Voters

but then I'm still cheering for Carol Mosley Braun
so take it with a grain of salt

[crankychatter]

31. Also - Earlier Convention - this time it's going to kill us

yup

we need more time to focus on the opposition with a unified electorate

[ColbertWatcher]

36. It seems...

...that no matter when we have our convention, the GOP always has it the week after.

[MaineDem]

38. The incumbent party always goes last

One of the perks of power.

[MadBadger]

33. Eliminate Caucuses, eliminate superdelegates, and make delegates directly proportional.

[dansolo]

34. Award delegates proportionally, but not by congressional district

I think that instead of apportioning the delegates in each congressional district based on previous Democratic vote totals, instead the votes from each congressional district should be weighted based on the same calculation, but then the weighted numbers should be totaled across the entire state, and the weighted statewide totals determine the number of delegates awarded. It accomplishes the same thing that they are trying to do now, without all the weird situations when the delegates are split up into the congressional districts. Effectively, it would allow for fractional delegates in congressional districts (e.g. a district with 2 delegates can only currently split 2-0, 1-1, 0-2, whereas here the split can more accurately reflect the actual vote split)

[FlyingSquirrel]

37. I would have said right up front that MI and FL would be penalized half their delegates

But allow the candidates to campaign there and discourage them from removing themselves from the ballot.

Not sure if I would have penalized them half their Supers as well - probably not but it doesn't really matter. The point is, people's votes would still have counted for SOMETHING and they could still have voted for the candidate of their choice.

At this point the damage is done and I think it's probably better to wait till the rest of the primaries are over and the remaining Superdelegates have endorsed, to address the issue. After that I'd support penalizing them each 1/2 their delegates and giving Uncommitted in MI to Obama (half of them).

[Youphemism]

39. Draft Senate Legislation To Require Separate Bathroom for Larry Craig

Democrats should join together to adopt a position to reduce both carbon and "wide stance" footprints in the capitol.

[datopbanana]

40. ya i would create the huckabee rule and flag HRC asap.