Reply #3: I don't think that might be such a good idea [View All]

[frazzled]

It takes a lot of time for people to get to know what candidates are about. A single-day nationwide primary vote would probably inevitably yield the candidate with the most name recognition as the winner. (The Republicans might have ended up with Giuliani as their candidate in this scenario.)

The current system has several benefits (in addition to its admitted messiness):

1. Candidates can test drive their campaigns in a few manageably-sized states and gain strength and recognition for later contests. Without this, lesser known candidates with less money would never even have a chance. The early states can be springboards for a campaign that might otherwise never be able to get off the ground. This gives us more choice in the end.

2. Candidates can gain momentum over time.

3. Buyer's remorse has time to set in.

4. Later contests can put a check on earlier contests.

5. A national primary would necessarily rely almost solely on television and radio advertising; debates could help--but we know how many few people who vote actually watch them. Besides, the best debaters aren't always the best presidents or even presidential candidates.