How would you reform the primary system?

[ElectionsGuy]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=228486.0

[beaver2.0]

Keep how it is, maybe more Caucus' and fewer Superdelegates.

[jimrtex]

I will substitute the words "political club" for "political party" to emphasize that they  are private organizations rather than an extension of the government.

Under the US Constitution, each state appoints presidential electors. They are not required to hold popular elections to determine the appointees, but all do. The fact that Congress can set the time of appointment contributed to this.

The candidates on the November ballot are placed there by state political clubs. The state political clubs are affiliated with national political clubs. The national political clubs dictate to the state political clubs who they will place on the state ballots. There is a quasi-democratic process by which the national political clubs choose the nominee.

But the states are in no position to reform the national political clubs. But they can reform the process by which the candidates are placed on the ballot.

In Texas elections for US Senator, there is a primary, and if necessary a primary runoff, and the winner is placed on the general election ballot.

There is no reason Texas could not use the same procedure for presidential elections. Each presidential candidate could designate 38 presidential elector candidates. There would be the primary, and a possible runoff, and the winner would be placed on the November ballot, along with the presidential electors.

But what would happen if different states had different presidential candidates in November?

The state of Texas would permit the Texas political clubs to designate political clubs in other states where similar primaries are held as long as they were held under the following conditions:

(1) No elections before the first of March. Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada would of course be free to hold their early straw polls.

(2) Same candidates on the ballot. States parties could hold caucuses, but would have to report the actual popular vote. Associated with each candidate would be delegate candidates designated by the  candidate.

(3) No withdrawal of candidates.

(4) Primaries could be held through the first of June. Delegates would be apportioned on a strictly proportional basis. If a candidate received 356,182 votes in a state, he would receive 356,182 delegate votes, allocated among a reasonable number of delegates, say one per 20,000 votes. Delegates could be awarded geographically by CD to any candidate who received 10,000 votes in  the CD. Other delegates could be awarded on a statewide basis (eg Jim Gilmore would get a delegate in each state, with a small number of convention votes).

(5) If a candidate receives a majority of the vote, he becomes the party nominee in all participating states.

(6) If no candidate receives a majority of the vote, then delegates meet to choose the presidential candidate. Presidential candidates could release their delegates, but could not dictate who they vote for, though they are of course free to encourage who they vote for.

If no candidate receives a majority on the first ballot, the last place presidential candidate will be eliminated, and a second ballot held. Presidential candidates could continue to release their delegates.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I would abolish delegates, super or otherwise. Or at least keep them, but decouple them from the selection of President. Every state would do an IRV election, and the cumulative vote total would be used. Smaller states would go first in the rota, then larger ones. Destroy all caucuses and make them all semi-open primaries. Ask all nominees to choose a running mate for Veep nominee. Uniform, national ballot (that could be modified as candidatea drop out obviously).

[Frodo]

I would change it to a rotating regional primary system, and removing all the caucuses (with the possible exception of Iowa) by changing them to primaries instead.  Apart from that, I'm fine with what we've got.  The proportional system as far as pledged delegates goes is a very nice feature, and one I have no desire to fiddle with. 

And the super-delegates (as much as they are criticized) is a fail-safe that keeps our primaries from turning into a circus the way the GOP has.        

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Update.

1. Add a certain percentage of superdelegates to the GOP nomination (though smaller than the number of pledged delegates)

2. Make the primary schedule less Southern in the early weeks, allowing for more mainstream conservatives to break out

[Slander and/or Libel]

Rotating regional primaries (no caucuses) with ranked choice balloting and proportional delegate allocation. Delegates reallocated in states that have already voted according to IRV rules as candidates drop out.