Posted on 07/03/2010 2:51:17 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
The RNC is likely to subtly alter their presidential nominating calendar in order to draw out the process of picking a candidate, according to a draft rule sent to members of the national committee today and obtained by Hotline OnCall.
The new rule, written after months of negotiations among senior members of the national committee, would push the beginning of the presidential nominating process back a month, to Feb., as part of a plan to prevent wealthy candidates from stealing the nomination.
GOP caucuses and primaries would be held that month in the 4 early states -- the rule codifies IA, NH, SC and NV as states allowed to hold contests in a "pre-window." Every other state would be allowed to hold their nominating contests on or after the first Tuesday in March.
But there's an important caveat: Any state that holds its nominating contest before the first day of April -- that is, any state that rushes to front-load their nominating process -- will have to award their delegates on a proportional basis.
[snip]
The change is designed to eliminate a process that rewards wealthy candidates with high name recognition. Instead, candidates will have to campaign across the country and appeal to different audiences, something that could help the GOP pick a stronger nominee.
"By making the second phase of the nominating process proportional, you reduce the possibility that any candidate in any one primary in any one state can deliver a knockout blow that early in the process and end the process prematurely," said John Ryder, TN's RNC representative and a member of the committee. Ryder said the goal is to have a 10-12 week nominating process that finishes before it can divide the party, but continues long enough to ensure the party picks the right nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com ...
A longer process benefits the candidate with the most money, namely Mitt “The RINO Rat” Romney.
ITA. But I won’t count out the Tea Party either. If it looks like the RNCs RINO is pulling ahead, look for a major donation push for the TP backed candidate.
Can we add to that list? No to John McCain, Newt Gingrich, Jeb Bush.
As you indicate, they may not like what they get if Palin is a candidate.
That's an issue that is decided by state law. They could, at least, get the closed-primary conservative states to move their primary dates up. The GOP won't do this because it would disrupt their "progressive" shift. Go ahead, Steele - prove me wrong.
Yes, that is correct. Has Steele been working with any state legislators *anywhere* toward such legislation? I strongly suspect not.
Addendum: The state law is all that matters; any political party would be subject to a change in the state law. Therefore, the Democrats would not have to “agree”.
California voted for open primaries.
"A California Top Two Primaries Act ballot proposition was on the June 8, 2010 ballot in California as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.
"Proposition 14 requires that candidates run in a single primary open to all registered voters, with the top two vote-getters meeting in a runoff. The new system will take effect in the 2012 elections."
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_14,_Top_Two_Primaries_Act_(June_2010)
I suspect the intent of this change is to put a premium on money and organization and to take its toll on an outsider’s ability to raise enough money to stay in the race over a protracted timeframe.
As you indicate, they may not like what they get if Palin is a candidate.
- - - - - - - - -
Can you see me smiling?
So that was you with that big ol’ grin? :)
The downside of this change, however, is that more precious time and money will be spent on an intra-party fight rather than getting at the Marxists. We’ll see how it works out. I have reservations about any scheme cooked up by the GOP establishment.
I understood, but was just asking as a practical matter. Even here in Texas (open primary), I doubt you could get a bill to close the primary without some sort of agreement between the parties.
BTW, next year is the only shot for a change here in TX. Legislature doesn't meet in 2012 unless a special session is called.
My Title: “RNC aims to re-elect Obama or their own Obama-lite.”
Yes indeed. That’s me grinning. BUT, we’re also on the same page.
Anything conceived by the RNC-GOP establishment has to be first viewed as Rosemary’s Baby, although if the intent was to stop Sarah, and promote Mitt, it looks to me like it will produce the opposite.
he(Mitt) can take his poop eating grin and stuff it!!!
he(Mitt) can take his poop eating grin and stuff it!!!
The state legislators would have to close the primaries, but I bet if the RNC set up a penalty of losing half the delegates or more for having an open primary, they would take notice.
Closed primaries and move up southern state voting earlier. Nothing else needs to be done.
Republicans have a chance to nominate Rosemary’s Baby and still win in 2012...maybe, if AMNESTY isn’t enacted by executive order. Great pun, by the way. I will be shocked that we are handed a presidential election though, without AMNESTY. No one wants a RINO in any case, on either side. But for the sake of the Republic, lets pray for a comer from the next generation, or even different political generation. Bridges are burned for Palin, McCain, even for Ron Paul. Can’t we even look at a Tom Coburn, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan? Someone with a brain, who can walk the Constitution across the country and chew up socialists without getting the cramps in venues outside of their own choir???
I'm not sure that's true. It's not like there's a fixed pot of money available, to be split between primary and general elections. An exciting candidate will attract money.
Here in Ohio the Republicans have a long history of avoiding contested primaries. I know of one candidate who was told by the Party leaders that even if he won the primary, he wouldn't get a dime from the State Party. Faced with that, he dropped out. The end result, though, has been candidates selected by the Party leadership, not by the Party members. The voters then tend to be uninterested. After all, the candidate isn't their candidate.
When I was County Chairman, I always argued for contested primaries. It got the voters mobilized, and gave the Party members a voice in selecting candidates.
Prop 14 applies to everything EXCEPT the CA presidential primary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.