Can we agree that this is a piss-poor way to select a nominee?

[dorkulon]

Superdelegates, staggered primaries, caucuses--why is this process so messy?

I think a one-shot national primary sounds like a better way. What do you folks think?

[thunder rising]

1. Have you actually donated to a campaign. How about donating 50X that much at once.

[XemaSab]

2. Hell no!

I think this is great...

You really are getting to see what the candidates are made of here. If there had been a one day national primary a certain candidate would have carried it in a walk, but I think this is a better way to pick a real winner.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

3. I agree about superdelegates and caucuses

but staggered primaries allow the candidates to be field-tested a lot more than a one-off primary election would. Witness how much public opinion has changed about the candidates through the primary process.

[MaineDem]

4. Sorry, I disagree

I think this is a great primary season.

It wasn't all wrapped up after the first 4 states. It wasn't decided by Super Tuesday. More states than in a long time have been "in play". I think it's awesome!

Hell, I remember when we didn't know until the votes were announced state-by-state at the convention.

[tyne]

6. This messed up

season is probably responsible for building a solid majority base for Dems....for years to come.

See what happens when the people of a country get to participate?

[napi21]

5. The reason there are staggered primaries is because no candidate

could ever rally get a large majority of votes is we had a one-shot primary nationwide on one day! Think about what you'd have if there were 8-10 candidates on each side. The other reason is of course no candidate can campaign in 50 States in a very short time. You'd have some States that were visited early during the primary race and then never appear again by primary day. I actually thnk it's much better than years ago when the nominee was selected by the party bosses in the "old smoke filled rooms. I'd prefer having "cluster primaries". Something where the US would be split into regional sections, like NE, SE, Middle, NW, & SW. Or maybe even by time zone. The candidates would be able to concentrate on the region next in line, and if the primaries were split by a month between them, it seems it would be better for everybody.

[sandnsea]

7. 5 elections a week for 3 months

You get 3 months before the first election to start campaigning. That's it.

Your way would guarantee a money and incumbent primary, no way someone like Obama, or Clinton, or Carter, would have a chance in hell.

[DrDan]

8. I agree with you . . .

superdelegates receive all the attention from the candidates . . .

and voters from two states are disenfranchised . . . .

what a farce . . .