the Primary System - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

FaderMonkey · 02-16-2004, 02:46 PM

I'm fairly new here, so if this has been discussed before, I apologize. I'm just confused about why our primary system is setup the way it is. Why don't all states just vote the same day? I feel like the farther along we get with the primaries that more and more people are voting for a candidate just because he/she is winning. I live in California and it seems that my vote in our primary is going to be worthless...all of the candidates except Kerry will probably be gone by then. Is there a good reason the system is setup the way it is??

Kadath · 02-17-2004, 06:02 AM

Well, the candidates campaign leading up to the primaries. If they were all at once, where would the candidates go? However, it WOULD be nice if they randomized the pattern or something...
2004 Primary Schedule

Looks like North Carolina gets the worst shaft. But Utah is pretty awful...

Quote:

In Utah, the holding of a state Presidential primary election is dependent upon funding by the legislature, which did not occur for 2004. Consequently, the Utah State Democratic Party scheduled a party-run Presidential preference primary for 2/24/04

Superbelt · 02-17-2004, 06:27 AM

I hate the system too. I live in Pa. I won't have a voice in the primary either.

Momentum and expectations are too much a factor in the primaries. If not a one day primary, all primary results should be kept closed and exit polling and any other polling done once the primary voting has started should be immediately halted, under threat of legal penalties.

Too many good candidates have shriveled and died in recent history because they didn't perform well in a small handfull of inconsequential states early in the primary season.

mml · 02-17-2004, 11:57 AM

If all of the primaries happened at once, only the candidates who had a lot of money or big name recognition would be able to win. Spreading them out, allows for lesser known candidates to gather support as time goes on. Bill Clinton, who was not very well know outside of the party faithful, slowly built up steam in the 92 race and did not clinch the nomination until June or July (I forget the exact date). This is the same strategy that John Edwards currently has. However, the Democratic party has allowed a number of states to move up their primaries and this year's "front-loaded" primaries have allowed Kerry to gain huge momentum from a few relatively small primaries. This early lead is thwarting the efforts of the "long-haul" candidates like Edwards. I am not sure I like the "front-loaded" primary as I think a longer campaign strengthens the candidates and delays the eventual attacks by the incumbant.

theusername · 02-17-2004, 12:01 PM

It allows them to actually interact with real people and for real people to vote for a person they've spent a lot of time looking at and hearing speak. If it were held all at once Howard Dean would be the nominee...

The only thing thats bad about primary voting, Republican and Democrat, is that the more extreme guy usually gets the primary voters excited more but will not do as well in the general election however it seems like this year they did alright, Kerrys a decent candidate who although not very charismatic and a dull speaker he is electable.

02-16-2004, 02:46 PM	#1 (permalink)
FaderMonkey Psycho Location: Orlando, FL	the Primary System I'm fairly new here, so if this has been discussed before, I apologize. I'm just confused about why our primary system is setup the way it is. Why don't all states just vote the same day? I feel like the farther along we get with the primaries that more and more people are voting for a candidate just because he/she is winning. I live in California and it seems that my vote in our primary is going to be worthless...all of the candidates except Kerry will probably be gone by then. Is there a good reason the system is setup the way it is??

02-17-2004, 11:57 AM	#4 (permalink)
mml Adrift Location: Wandering in the Desert of Life	If all of the primaries happened at once, only the candidates who had a lot of money or big name recognition would be able to win. Spreading them out, allows for lesser known candidates to gather support as time goes on. Bill Clinton, who was not very well know outside of the party faithful, slowly built up steam in the 92 race and did not clinch the nomination until June or July (I forget the exact date). This is the same strategy that John Edwards currently has. However, the Democratic party has allowed a number of states to move up their primaries and this year's "front-loaded" primaries have allowed Kerry to gain huge momentum from a few relatively small primaries. This early lead is thwarting the efforts of the "long-haul" candidates like Edwards. I am not sure I like the "front-loaded" primary as I think a longer campaign strengthens the candidates and delays the eventual attacks by the incumbant. __________________ Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -Douglas Adams

02-17-2004, 06:27 AM	#3 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	I hate the system too. I live in Pa. I won't have a voice in the primary either. Momentum and expectations are too much a factor in the primaries. If not a one day primary, all primary results should be kept closed and exit polling and any other polling done once the primary voting has started should be immediately halted, under threat of legal penalties. Too many good candidates have shriveled and died in recent history because they didn't perform well in a small handfull of inconsequential states early in the primary season.

02-17-2004, 12:01 PM	#5 (permalink)
theusername Insane	It allows them to actually interact with real people and for real people to vote for a person they've spent a lot of time looking at and hearing speak. If it were held all at once Howard Dean would be the nominee... The only thing thats bad about primary voting, Republican and Democrat, is that the more extreme guy usually gets the primary voters excited more but will not do as well in the general election however it seems like this year they did alright, Kerrys a decent candidate who although not very charismatic and a dull speaker he is electable.