Republicans need to change their nomination procedure

[CARLHAYDEN]

If the Republicans want to avoid anoter McCain disaster, they need to modify their rules for primaries.

First, the winner take all system allowed on candidate with a minority of the total vote, and a very narrow plurality to take everything.

Second, McCain was able to win narrow pluralities in early primary states courtesy of the votes of non-Republicans in the Republican primaries.  The Democrats have recognized the problem with such 'raidable' primaries, the Republicans should wake up to the problems, and close the primaries.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I hate to break it to you people, but McCain's being the nominee wasn't why you lost.

Quite the contrary, it's the only reason they kept the margin of victory in single digits.

Well, had a little time to do some research, and looked at the numbers for the crucial (for McCain) New Hampshire primary.

First, the exit poll showed that Romney won the vote of 35% of those voters in the Republican primary who identified themselves as Republicans, whereas McCain won the vote of 34% of those voters who identified themselves as Republicans,

Second, as to the allegation that McCain was winning over non-Republicans, I cross-decked the townships in New Hampshire between their primary and general election votes.  Of the 37 townships where McCain did best in the primary, he carried 8 in the general election.  Of the 37 townships where Romney prevailed in the primary, 27 voted for McCain in the general election.

[CARLHAYDEN]

If the Republicans want to avoid anoter McCain disaster, they need to modify their rules for primaries.

First, the winner take all system allowed on candidate with a minority of the total vote, and a very narrow plurality to take everything.

Second, McCain was able to win narrow pluralities in early primary states courtesy of the votes of non-Republicans in the Republican primaries.  The Democrats have recognized the problem with such 'raidable' primaries, the Republicans should wake up to the problems, and close the primaries.

Well, the RNC listened to me on my first point:

III. Proportional Allocation Requirement for Nominating Processes Held Before April 1st

 Any state (other than the four states allowed to conduct their processes in February) conducting its process prior to April 1, 2012 must allocate its delegates proportionally

I understand they are working on the second point, but, due to a number of conflicting court decisions, which is strange considering the ruling in California Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567 (2000), closing primaries may not occur until a subsequent election.

[CARLHAYDEN]

III. Proportional Allocation Requirement for Nominating Processes Held Before April 1st

 Any state (other than the four states allowed to conduct their processes in February) conducting its process prior to April 1, 2012 must allocate its delegates proportionally

Yes, though as I explain here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=128721.msg2829427#msg2829427

the states don't have to use "real" PR.  They can use a kind of hybrid that would still allow the statewide winner to get all / nearly all the delegates if they win statewide by a decent margin.

True, its not perfect, but, its a step in the right direction.

[CARLHAYDEN]

McCain was able to win narrow pluralities in early primary states courtesy of the votes of non-Republicans in the Republican primaries.  The Democrats have recognized the problem with such 'raidable' primaries, the Republicans should wake up to the problems, and close the primaries.

I understand they are working on [this] but, due to a number of conflicting court decisions, which is strange considering the ruling in California Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567 (2000), closing primaries may not occur until a subsequent election.

I fail to see the relevance of California Democratic Party v. Jones.  The issue of open primaries is not relevant to that case and Scalia's footnotes in his opinion indicate that he would at least give consideration to the idea that voting in an open primary is an act of association, and might even be in favor of that view.  In any case, the closed primary is for now at least, impossible to implement in at least one early primary State, South Carolina.  We have no party registration that could be used to close a primary.

Ernest,

I am pleased to see you disagree with me.

Its too bad you are unable to understand the difference between a holding of a court and footnotes which are not binding precedence.

Uh, do you know what precedence is in jurisprudence?

Hint: look up the term "obiter dictum" in Black's.