Skip to comments.GOP Crafts New Rules To Shorten 2016 Primary Season
Posted on 12/30/2013 8:44:43 AM PST by Theoria
A year after losing the popular vote for the fifth time in the last six presidential elections, the Republican Party has crafted a series of rules tweaks designed to regain control of and dramatically shorten its presidential nominating process.
The subcommittee charged with looking for fixes has approved five proposed changes for review by the Republican National Committee's rules committee at its January meeting. The full RNC would then need to pass the changes by a three-quarters supermajority.
"I think this strikes a good balance," said John Ryder, the RNC's general counsel.
February 2016 would be set aside for the traditional early states: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. The other states could start as soon as March 1, but could not hold winner-take-all contests before March 15. Larger states that violate either of those rules would lose all but nine of their delegates to the summer nominating convention, not counting their three RNC members who are automatic delegates. Smaller states would lose two-thirds of their delegates, not including the three RNC members.
At the back end of the calendar, state parties would have to submit their slates of convention delegates 45 days prior to the convention, rather than 35 days. With RNC leaders hoping to schedule the convention in late June, rather than late August, this would mean the last primaries and caucuses would have to be set for mid-May thereby cutting what was a six-month-long process in 2012 down to three-and-a-half months.
The balancing act, Ryder said, was to compress the calendar without giving an insurmountable advantage to a candidate who has "$200 million on day one."
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
Just don’t have endless debates moderated by journ-0-lists!
Another part of their strategy is to once again pre-select their establishment candidate whose “turn” it is,
and then place him against 5 conservative candidates that the base actually wants.
The establishment candidate gets 40% of the primary votes,
and each of the others gets 10-15% of the votes.
Haven’t we seen this game a few times already?
The GOP-E doesn't want closed primaries.
Liberal Republicans are unelectable.
Ever notice that the “Boehner Bus” only has Conservative Republicans under it?
I wonder who they’re referring to who will have ‘$200mil on day one’.
I have an idea.
Just have one primary, and make it in Texas.
Easy there. I live here, in a few more years it will be California with guns.
The winner would not necesarrily be the richest, but the baddest ass ... and I think we could use a basdass Pubbie right about now.
No more, "My esteemed opponant .. " crap.
"Why, just last week that sleazy bastard ... "
Let the fur fly.
Democrats would vote for a Republican fighter !
wait a minute... the GOP itself can make the rule to change their primaries to ‘closed’??????
I thought it was somethign that HAD TO BE out of their control (controlled by individual states)
You mean THEY HAVE A CHOICE AND DONT STOP THIS?????
There is no reason why we have to even have the New Hampshire primary and Iowa caucuses going first. There is no reason why we have to have open primaries and go state by state over a period of months. There is no reason why we have to sit there while George Stefanapolos*0(sp?) asks absurd hypotheticals such as whether states can ban birth control.
Many things should change.
Well it would be nice if we actually did have some kind of say as to who the nominee will be.
Nah. The media loves to drag it out. Mo’ money from political advertising.
They had best be careful and rethink what they ask for. Sometimes the result from such actions are far worse than they imagine.
-— I notice that closed primaries aren’t on the agenda. -—
This is all so dammed frustrating.
The only short-term solution is to have Rush, Beck, Sean,and Mark endorse a candidate early.
How about an UNendorsement of the GOPe candidate?
“See, they’ve set it up again - the establishment candidate vs 5 conservatives to split the vote. Now, I’m going to say it loud and clear, I UNENDORSE the establishment candidate!”
These rules would help some if only one other change were added: Any state which actually voted for the GOP candidate in the last presidential election has its delegates doubled or tripled.
A rule ignored last election, when Florida held their primary early. They should have lost half their delegates. Rule ignored. Romney wins the primary.
I suggest we drop all rules and regulations and just let them slug it out.
“The winner would not necesarrily be the richest, but the baddest ass ... and I think we could use a basdass Pubbie right about now.
No more, “My esteemed opponant .. “ crap.
“Why, just last week that sleazy bastard ... “
Let the fur fly.”
I wish we would just tell NH and IOWA to pound sand with their early open primaries.
In fact they should make the rules have only closed primaries and sore loser rules.
Mix in the super-delegates and that gives the GOPelite candidate a very big advantage from the start. Unless the preferred candidate crashes and burns early, the nomination is probably a foregone conclusion.
Of course, there will be the retreads from 2008 and 2012, and the hangers-on who help split the votes. Ironically (or by design) those hangers-on tend to split the conservative vote rather than the GOPelite vote. Isn’t that curious.
Of course, from 2008 and 2012, the challengers were not that stellar of a bunch anyway:
the talkshow host who has zipper problems,
the female who actually was kind of flakey,
the one with brain-freeze when it came to naming the departments he would eliminate,
the deposed former House speaker who supposedly would out-debate Obama, but lost the 2 Florida debates to the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama,
the one who couldn’t retain his own Senate seat,
and for 2012, the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama.
Now, we already hear rumblings from Huckabee (his evangelical friends are just begging him to run). Even McCain and Romney, both hinting.
The most interesting might be the Dem race again — watching another unknown come out of the woodwork and send Hillary’s coronation trip into the abyss.
I’ve seen that too, but how do you fix that? I think all conservatives have got to unite around an acceptable conservative candidate.
The problem is, so many conservatives refuse to bend when it comes to nominating their side’s candidate. No one is ever good enough for the majority of conservatives. They will only vote for their guy and will refuse to vote in the general election if their “guy” doesn’t’ win The primary.
They will even vote for a democrat just to spite those they disagree with.
I’ve seen that happen on several primary seasons.
I had to look up hortatory though.
Nah, won’t work. They will be just as shocked when, in a shorter primary, their guys lose even faster.
Romney was a liberal.
Liberal Republicans are unelectable.
Instead of whining about how conservatives won't vote for the liberal GOP-E candidate, why don't you push for a conservative candidate, and stop rewarding the GOP-E with your vote when they nominate a liberal.
Actually, think about it: a shorter period FAVORS the “non-establishment” candidate who will usually have less money. The longer the campaign, the more it works against the lesser-funded candidate.
Speaking as a no-GOP person, if they really wanted to do some good, they would forbid anyone to announce their candidacy or speak on the possibility of other members’ candidacies more than about 12 months from the election day. These increasingly long campaigns are causing political fatigue in the general public, especially with all the negative campaign ads.
Yup. The conservatives need to pick one and put ONE person on stage with the GOPe idiot.
I’ve said before the tea party needs their own primary before the GOPe one.
Send the ONE winner to the stage with Cristy.. You likely will only be able to fit one more on the stage anyways.
Or those states that actually went to the GOP in the general get to have primaries first. They can figure out how order the primaries out of that bunch.
Oh yes and it has been that way for some time. The GOP could just say, if you have a closed primary, you get to have 100% of your delegates. If you have an open primary, you only get 50% of your delegates.
One election/primary cycle would be all it takes to return the GOP back to conservatives. But conservatives are not in power right now at the GOP.
That's why the media wants Christie. Mrs. Clinton will look fit and trim by comparison.
A big thing they should do would be to make the order of states (who primaries first) based of percentages of Repub votes from the last Presidential cycle. The 5 states with the biggest Repub-Dem split would primary first, then the next 5 get the next week or two to primary, and so on until you have CA and MA and everyone else at the end, once the field has been whittled down to proper conservatives.
“I have an idea. Just have one primary, and make it in Texas.”
I have a better idea...
Only closed primaries count. Open primaries or a caucus would be considered as nothing more than a straw poll.
The dates of primaries would be chosen based on the percentage of votes given to the Republican POTUS candidate in the previous election. The higher the percentage the earlier the primary date.
Primaries could be grouped by region using the above formula is so desired.
The liberal $hitholes in the NE and the left coast would be going last!
I am in agreement. The order of the states primaries for 2016 should start with the states with the highest support of the republican candidate in the previous pResidental election. Oh and don’t let registered deomcRats vote in republican primaries. That way Texas, Oklahoma Idaho etc. would be picking the candidate.
Though I do think we need less debates, and NONE moderated by NBC, I get the feeling the RNC is planning everything around Krispy Kreme.
Conservatives must unite during the PRIMARY elections in their state in order to compete against the RINO candidate - nominating 10 different conservatives against the GOPe candidate is never going to work.
I’ve been to Republican caucus meetings in my state for the last three presidential primaries and the conservatives rarely work together to support an acceptable conservative candidate - everyone has their idea of what a conservative truly is and refuses to budge on their definition - no one ever seems to get the big picture of defeating the lion in your face.
I’m not talking about supporting Romney, I’m talking about the primary process. How can a conservative candidate win against the establishment candidate when conservatives are so busy fighting each other they can’t unite behind even ONE acceptable candidate??
Then the “true” conservatives who refused to compromise even a little will not only help nominate the worst candidate, but destroy the country as well- a very pernicious ideology.
On top of that they will feel very self-righteous about it as well.
And I’m not talking about compromising on core beliefs - conservatives will often refuse to support another conservative because “they aren’t good in a debate” or “20 years ago one of them voted for a democrat” or “they have too many skeletons” in their closet” or their voice sounds funny or they are too “fundamentalist” or too Catholic and on and on.
We’ve GOT to unite within our respective states - economic and social conservatives - Tea Party and Libertarians - if we don’t it’s all over and the enemy’s won.
The GOP-E will NEVER go for that, or anything else that doesn't stack the cards in the favor of the liberal candidate.
“Another part of their strategy is to once again pre-select their establishment candidate whose turn it is,
and then place him against 5 conservative candidates that the base actually wants....”
It’s clear that Huckabee has already “unofficially” volunteered to be one of these “conservative” candidates to attract some votes from a true candidate such as Ted Cruz. Huckabee has already performed his first chore for the GOPe by endorsing his fellow false conservative Little Lindsey Graham.
I hope that Huckabee is NOT fooling any of you conservatives out there—but he probably is.
The caucus is a closed system in most states. At the Washingto one you were asked to show your voter registation with party affiliation on it to attend.
We had problems with the GOP establishment messing with caucus votes to advantage Romney. It was unseemly.
Don’t matter, caucus wouldn’t count.
Anything that requires someone to screw around for an hour or more doesn’t represent the views of the electorate.
People that work nights can’t even vote.
I like that idea of a run-off primary.
Can you say Tim Pawlenty, Thad McCotter, Herman Cain, Gary Johnson, Buddy Roemer, John Huntsman, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and the perennial Ron Paul??
If the public has to say "Who?" or "Not him again!!" or the candidate doesn't have the committment to follow through, get 'em out of the gene pool.