Should there be a national primary election day when all states hold their primaries on the same day?

2016-02-22T15:28:00-05:00

I never liked how candidates I might vote for drop out before my state's primary. Why should Iowa and New Hampshire results determine who continues in the race? Those states are not representative of the country as a whole. Why not hold all primaries on the same day, maybe in May, so each candidate could be considered in each state? Why should early states get ten candidates and later only two?

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Feb 22 at 2016 3:32 PM

2016-02-22T15:32:39-05:00

If the primary was only held for about 4 hours it would diminish voter fraud LTC Private RallyPoint Member. Iowa and New Hampshire would fight this idea tooth and nail. California, New York and Texas would probably welcome it.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Feb 22 at 2016 3:33 PM

2016-02-22T15:33:43-05:00

Yes. Having the primaries spread out means that voters in states with later primaries don't have the choices that those in states that vote earlier have.

Response by SGT Lou Meza made Feb 22 at 2016 3:42 PM

2016-02-22T15:42:21-05:00

A National Primary Day would be something I would vote for . I don't like the idea that the early states primaries decide who advances to the next state primaries . The whole country should be able to vote for any of the whole slew of candidates . Then we will know who will be the candidate for each party .

Response by SP5 Mark Kuzinski made Feb 22 at 2016 3:49 PM

2016-02-22T15:49:58-05:00

It would be crazy but look at what's going on right now. I'm ready for November-bring it!

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2016 3:56 PM

2016-02-22T15:56:30-05:00

I would like it. However, to mandate such would just another thing dictated by the federal government.

Also remember that nothing is decided until the conventions are held. The end candidates could and have been someone other than anticipated.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2016 4:03 PM

2016-02-22T16:03:49-05:00

National Voting Day! Everyone gets the day off work and if you vote you get a tax break. The last election saw a turn out of just 36%. How great would it be to see one over 90%? Congress again would be scared of the people they represent.

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Feb 22 at 2016 4:17 PM

2016-02-22T16:17:46-05:00

LTC Private RallyPoint Member How do you think I feel living in California? The democrats overwhelm we'uns anyhow!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2016 4:29 PM

2016-02-22T16:29:05-05:00

Yes

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2016 4:29 PM

2016-02-22T16:29:15-05:00

And an open primary at that.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Feb 22 at 2016 4:36 PM

2016-02-22T16:36:22-05:00

I "think" it would actually result in a more fragmented system.

Right now, it's like a footrace where we see people drop out incrementally. If we did them all on the same day, we would need to do "ladder divisions" like a tournament. Currently as people drop out, folks can think about who their second/third choice is, but as a ladder bracket happens, that becomes progressively more difficult to conceptualize for the average voter.

It's not that I disagree with you, just that I'm looking at the "system" as a whole.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Feb 22 at 2016 5:37 PM

2016-02-22T17:37:53-05:00

AMEN...I am all about that. It would make them focus on all the voters versus all these other caucuses.

Response by SSgt Robert Marx made Feb 22 at 2016 5:44 PM

2016-02-22T17:44:42-05:00

I believe that the primary system is largely the connivance of the parties. I suppose tightening up the system is in order. My state, Montana, does not vote until June and so the show is over by that point. I think that shortening the primary season considerably would be the ticket.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2016 5:48 PM

2016-02-22T17:48:37-05:00

I like that about the primary. It weeds our candidates with less support and helps to go from having 16 candidates to having a winner. Also the way it is lets more likely then not the winner will have over 50% of the total vote.

Response by SSgt Christopher Brose made Feb 23 at 2016 1:53 AM

2016-02-23T01:53:48-05:00

I agree with your instincts, because you are absolutely right about how unfair the process is to people in states with late primaries. But I don't think having all the primaries on one day solves anything. The Repubs and Dems start with a slate of candidates, and the paring down process takes time, there's just no getting around that.

Instead, I propose two reforms to the election process. First, for all presidential elections, make all the polls be open all across the country at exactly the same times. In Maine, they would be open from 6:00am to midnight, and in Hawaii they would be open from midnight to 6:00pm. That way, everybody's vote is exactly as relevant as everyone else's, and people on then east coast don't get to decide the election before the people on the west coast can vote.

Second, have a runoff election, about a month after the general election in November. The November vote would eliminate all candidates but the top two vote-getters. The runoff election would decide which of those two will be President. This is to address two major related issues. It would wrest the deathgrip the two major parties have on the election process, by making it possible for everyone to vote for the candidate they truly feel is best for the country in November, without feeling like they are wasting their votes, because they will get to vote again between the two top candidates.

How would that limit the current unfairness of the primaries? By making it so that any candidate that doesn't win the Repub or Dem nomination can still run with another party or as an independent. I believe it would take several years for the effect to really be noticed, just like the advent of the internet didn't immediately change how people get their news. But I believe it would have the same inexorable effect.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2016 7:20 AM

2016-02-23T07:20:40-05:00

... so the system can control which candidate had the best chance to win.