Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)

18. During the primary, I suggested having 2 rounds of primaries.

Reply to sarisataka (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 22, 2016, 06:23 PM

Dec 2016

With those below a certain threshold eliminated after the first round.

But it might be better to just have one round of 4 primaries with each primary consisting of 12-13 states (representing every region of the US). Each primary would be 4-6 weeks apart.

No single state or region would have undue influence.

And I agree with others that something needs to be done about campaign spending. Public funding would be ideal, with each candidate having the same exact amount to spend. At the very least, there should be a cap on how much can be spent. I don't want to open the door to some fringe lunatic winning the nomination, but I also want the party to provide opportunity for those who aren't already very well-known and well-funded.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do we need to replace Iowa as the first in the nation during primary season? [View all] LonePirate Dec 2016 OP

"We" can't do it. States pick their own schedules. The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #1

We can apply the FL/MI punishment from 2008 when they jumped the gun. LonePirate Dec 2016 #3

In a perfect world, yes. Also New Hampshire should take a backseat. Va Lefty Dec 2016 #2

The problem with putting a large state first is that it's harder for a lesser known candidate to win mythology Dec 2016 #4

Before trump that was true, but it's clear they don't need to do that type of campaigning. rogue emissary Dec 2016 #8

But only a celebrity engaging in buffoonery can rely on free media. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #16

We are not a federalist top down fiefdom yet. There is nothing wrong with the CK_John Dec 2016 #5

Obama Won Iowa both times JI7 Dec 2016 #6

he's underwater in his approval ratings there now. it's swung back to its natural status as a solid geek tragedy Dec 2016 #14

It's been won or nearly won by the Dem. nominee quite a few times in recent history. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #15

It was barely considered a swing state from 1988 through 2012 (the Democratic nominee won the Midwestern Democrat Dec 2016 #20

with all the money and publicity Iowa gets from the situation rurallib Dec 2016 #7

I think it should be a different state each primary season. Crunchy Frog Dec 2016 #9

I agree. SharonClark Dec 2016 #19

I don't think any single state should have so much influence. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #10

YES YES YES YES beaglelover Dec 2016 #11

I just want it to be a state (or states) that's representative of the US. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #12

I'd be OK with that too. beaglelover Dec 2016 #13

I would like to see two primaries sarisataka Dec 2016 #17

During the primary, I suggested having 2 rounds of primaries. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #18