Better primary schedule--a different take

[kurtyboy]

Check out my proposal--I think it takes advantage of a lot of things, and eliminates many complaints about the current system. A winner will not be quickly picked, but consider how well that worked this year.

The system is based on 2004 Delegate allocations (2162 needed for nomination) which will change somewhat in 2008. Anyway, here goes....

WEEK ONE, January 29th, 2008—3EV states & territories. (Major Geographic diversity, 6% of Delegates on the line) Alaska RED (18), American Samoa NoEV (6), Delaware BLUE (23), Democrats Abroad NoEV (9), Dist. of Columbia BLUE (39), Guam NoEV (5), Montana RED (21), North Dakota RED (22), Puerto Rico NoEV (57), South Dakota RED (22), Vermont BLUE (27), Virgin Islands NoEV (6), Wyoming RED (19)---Total delegates at stake: 269 (6%)

WEEK TWO, February 5th, 2008—4EV States. Idaho RED (23), Hawaii BLUE (29) Maine BLUE (35), New Hampshire BLUE (27), Rhode Island BLUE (32)---Total delegates at stake: 146 (3%)

WEEK THREE, February 12th, 2008—5EV States. Nebraska RED (31), Nevada RED (32), New Mexico RED (37), Utah RED (29), West Virginia RED (39)---Total delegates at stake: 168 (4%)

WEEK FOUR, February 19th, 2008—6EV States. Arkansas RED (47), Mississippi RED (41), Kansas RED (41)---Total delegates at stake: 129 (3%)

WEEK FIVE, February 26th, 2008—7EV States. Connecticut BLUE (62), Iowa RED (57), Oklahoma RED (47), Oregon BLUE (59)---Total delegates at stake: 225 (5%)

WEEK SIX, March 4th, 2008—8EV States. Kentucky RED (57), South Carolina RED (55)---Total delegates at stake: 112 (3%)

WEEK SEVEN, March 11th, 2008—9EV States. Alabama RED (62), Colorado RED (63), Louisiana RED (72)---Total delegates at stake: 197 (5%)

WEEK SEVEN, March 18th, 2008—10EV States. Arizona RED (64), Maryland BLUE (99), Minnesota BLUE (86), Wisconsin BLUE (87)---Total delegates at stake: 336 (8%)

WEEK NINE, March 25th, 2008—11EV States. Indiana RED (81), Missouri RED (88), Tennessee RED (85), Washington BLUE (95)---Total delegates at stake: 349 (8%)

WEEK TEN—April 1st, 2008—12EV State. Massachusetts BLUE (121), Total delegates at stake: 121 (3%)

WEEK ELEVEN, April 8th, 2008—13 EV State. Virginia RED (98)---Total delegates at stake: 98 (2%) This would be the first week that a nomination could conceivably be clinched—it is very unlikely in this distributed scenario, however...

WEEK TWELVE, April 15th, 2008—15EV States. Georgia RED (101), North Carolina RED (107), New Jersey BLUE (128)---Total delegates at stake: 336 (8%)

WEEK THIRTEEN, April 22nd, 2008—17EV State. Michigan BLUE (155)---Total delegates at stake: 155 (3%)

WEEK FOURTEEN, April 29th, 2008—20EV State. Ohio RED (159)---Total delegates at stake: 159 (4%)

WEEK FIFTEEN, May 6th, 2008—21EV States. Illinois BLUE (186), Pennsylvania BLUE (178)---Total delegates at stake: 314 (8%)

WEEK SIXTEEN, May 13th, 2008—27EV State. Florida RED (201)---Total delegates at stake: 201 (5%)

WEEK SEVENTEEN, May 20th, 2008—31EV State. New York BLUE (284)---Total delegates at stake: 284 (7%)

WEEK EIGHTEEN, May 27th, 2008—34EV State. Texas RED (232)---Total delegates at stake: 232 (5%)

WEEK NINETEEN, June 3rd, 2008—55EV State. California BLUE (441)---Total delegates at stake: 441 (10%)

If this was started the last week of January, It would wrap up by the first week of June--perfect, if you ask me. Going at things this way assures that small states get their voice early (and perhaps for the only time), and bigger states get to do the heavy lifting after enduring a lot of jockeying by candidates.

There is a fairly even distribution of red to blue states throughout—but there are a few weeks (3,4,6,7) where it is all red, even though multiple states are represented. This plays into our party’s hand—the press will emphasize the importance of appealing to the red-state voters, and any candidate finding success will have gone through the crucible—AND will have cemented a base in those red states, because of the emphasis.

The big drawback is that a huge amount of resources are expended by viable candidates over an extended primary--the very thing the DNC was trying to avoid in this latest run. But ask yourself--What did an early, obvious nominee gain for us this time? (BTW, I was a Kerry supporter starting in Sept 2003...)

Check out how each week has a very broad geographic (and presumably social) spread--this can only be a good thing. I can't see how a nominee would be chosen before the last eight weeks....And again, note the early attention to RED states.....Perhaps the Nominee would be extra-strong in the ensuing race with the GOP.

Post your thoughts……..

Thanks

Kurt

[SoCalDem]

1. I like a 6 week primary.. strictly regional

Both parties hold to same schedule so there is no hankypanky..

It would show true regional support for candidates, and keep the travel regionalized for the candidates