Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forumOur presidential nomination process has become absurd
By David Leonhardt
Andrew Yang began his closing statement at the last Democratic debate with a charming bit of self-deprecation: I know what youre thinking, America. How am I still on this stage with them? Yang has never been elected to any office. He is a businessman who has never run a major company. Even so, he is one of the Democratic Partys seven leading candidates for an election that everybody agrees is desperately important. The other six on the debate stage included another businessman who has never held office and a mayor who has never won an election with more than 10,991 votes.
As funny as Yangs line may have been, he was highlighting a real problem: Our process for selecting presidential nominees is badly flawed. It is, as Jonathan Rauch and Ray La Raja recently wrote in the Atlantic, a spectacle that would have struck earlier generations as ludicrous. It has come to resemble a reality television show, in which a pseudoscientific process (polls plus donor numbers) winnows the field. The winner is then chosen by a distorted series of primaries and caucuses: The same few states always get outsize influence, and a crude, unranked voting system can produce a nominee whom most people dont want.
(snip)
Im not suggesting we return to the smoke-filled rooms of the past. But the current process puts a higher priority on the appearance of democracy than the reality of it. Were left with candidates fighting to do well enough in early polls to get into the debates and then to win 30% of the vote in Iowa and New Hampshire, which can launch them toward the nomination. A better approach would balance snapshots of popular opinion with rules more likely to produce strong, qualified nominees.
The first change should be to the debates. The candidates electoral history and qualifications currently count for nothing. The 2020 Democratic field, for example, has included four two-term governors, all of whom have been excluded from debates despite a track record of winning votes and governing successfully. In their place have been candidates, like Yang, who managed to crack 4% in a few polls. It makes more sense for only the true polling leaders to be guaranteed debate slots. Beyond them, the party could set aside at least one spot for a governor and perhaps one for a senator from a large state or swing state. A second set of changes would involve the primaries themselves. More states should adopt ranked-choice voting, allowing voters to list their second and third choices.
(snip)
Its also past time to end the special treatment that Iowa and New Hampshire receive, by always voting first. They are two overwhelmingly white, disproportionately baby boomer states (and the fact that Iowa voted for Barack Obama in 2008 doesnt give it a permanent pass). The primary calendar should instead rotate every four years, with the first states always including a mix of states: big and small, young and old, urban and rural, coastal and heartland.
More..
http://www.startribune.com/our-presidential-nomination-process-has-become-absurd/566664761/
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)from party supporters, we have a free-for-all where a new-age guru can make it to the debate stage.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
question everything
(47,542 posts)Since when does the party caves to someone who is not a Democrat?
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
KPN
(15,662 posts)they get them. It comes from an establishment that is slow to change in response to voter wishes and desires and, instead, maintains the status quo because it benefits them; it perpetuates their importance to the system and, consequently, their power -- or so they perceive despite the law of unintended consequences. It comes from a mainstream media that has out-sized influence over the entire process including the debates; influence that is principally geared to to maximizing their returns during the nomination and GE processes as well as after the election.
Frankly, I'm glad Yang is in it. I'm glad Sanders is in it. I'm glad Warren is in it. I'm glad Buttigieg is in it. I'm glad Booker is in it. Until the system improves, I'm all for new faces of leadership.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
dsc
(52,168 posts)I can't for the life of me figure out why Inslee didn't do better than he did. Though I think his over reliance on climate change as an issue to the detriment of his admirable record in WA was a mistake. I also was surprised by Hickenlooper's poor showing though since he is more moderate I understand why he might struggle.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
question everything
(47,542 posts)But the whole process of relying on donors and polls was influenced, let's be honest, by "social media." There "revolutionary ideas" like various freebies get the voters excited translated to donations and polls. Steady, ho-hum practical ideas like infrastructure, attempts at bi partisanship do not excite enough people.
Yes, Biden is not an exciting candidate but I am glad that enough voters see beyond the lack of fireworks, even the age, to conclude that we need a steady hand to replace the delusional, insecure current occupant of the White House.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
dsc
(52,168 posts)His attack of the Obama campaign for using Romney's connection to Bain, his working with Christie to use charter schools to weaken the teacher's union in Newark, his coziness with pharmacutical companies to name three.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
KPN
(15,662 posts)by always voting first. They are two overwhelmingly white, disproportionately baby boomer states ..." and
"The same few states always get outsize influence, and a crude, unranked voting system can produce a nominee whom most people dont want."
What's the end result? A disenchanted electorate that can't be counted on; ergo, tRump in 2016.
----
Oh, and I disagree that Yang's persistence is indicative of a problem in any way other than it's a logical, reasonable and appropriate response.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided