[rktman]

This past caucus in NV was the first one we attended since moving here and it was more like "CACA" than caucus. Poorly organized, confusing and just a general mess. We didn't need to "caucus" with anyone, we knew who we wanted to support and didn't need to sit and listen to some unknown assclown try to convince us to change our opinion. Took a while to get to the "ballot" and state our preference. What a joke. Except for the fact that there was a large turn out.

[joesbucks]

Fact is, all primaries should be held on one date. One and done.

[napscoordinator]

Please don’t replace it with Utah whatever you do.

[justlurking]

Staggering the state primaries is simply an effort to control the outcome, by selecting certain states to grant front-runner status.

If either party wanted true "fairness", they would have a nationwide primary on the same day, with one-man, one vote. Forget the caucuses, and all the other shenanigans that can be manipulated.

It would also be an opportunity to implement the same uniform process in every state. Winner-take-all will give more power to the largest states, but something like "1 delegate for each win in a Congressional district, plus 2 delegates for the winner of a state" would be a reasonable compromise. This is how Maine and Nebraska allocate electoral college votes. If you want to scale it up to more delegates than 535, that's OK.

If there is a large field of candidates, voting for a single candidate can make it difficult for some people to make a choice. That can be solved by using "instant-runoff" voting.

Instant Runoff

Short version: you rank your candidates, #1, #2, #3, etc. until you have ranked all of the candidates, or exhausted your preferences.

In the first round of calculation, the votes for candidates specified as #1 on all ballots are counted. If one candidate receives a MAJORITY (not a plurality), they win the election.

If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate receiving the least #1 votes is eliminated. Then, those ballots specifying the eliminated candidate as #1 are recounted, using their #2 votes.

The process repeats as many times as necessary, eliminating the candidate with the lowest number of votes (and using the next candidate on those ballots, if any), until a candidate has a majority of votes.

[mac_truck]

The low turnout criticism is a canard.

Make early states move to a primary voting system or lose their place a the front of the pack.

[Bulwinkle]

Keep Nevada, dump the Iowa Ethanol Lobby Caucus

[Duchess47]

Please get rid of our caucus, give us back our primaries.

Poor turnout is because this is a 24/7 state, millions of people can’t vote in a two/three hour window in the middle of the week.

Poorly organized and confusing in my opinion is what the Nevada Republican Party was aiming for. Changing everyone’s precinct site, doubling and tripling precincts voting at one location, no mail outs, stating you had to be registered for the caucus, not registered to vote only but registered for the caucus also.

This year was particularly bad compared to our two previous so it had to be deliberate.

[Salvation]

Nevada needs to drop the caucus and let people vote in a primary election.