Republicans consider "Midwestern primary" and July convention

[Miles]

Article.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

The July convention is old news.

As for the "Midwestern primary day".....Um.....How do you convince all those states to move their primaries?  How do you get Illinois, for example, to move to a primary day that the RNC wants, when the state legislature is controlled by Democrats?  And when do you hold it?  Arizona, for example, is already on Feb. 23, so do you hold it before then, or try to push Arizona later, and how do you push them later?

Priebus has always seemed to overestimate how much control the RNC can exert over the primary calendar.

[Lief 🗽]

Looks like they're shutting out their Southern conservative base. Disgusting.

[muon2]

The July convention is old news.

As for the "Midwestern primary day".....Um.....How do you convince all those states to move their primaries?  How do you get Illinois, for example, to move to a primary day that the RNC wants, when the state legislature is controlled by Democrats?  And when do you hold it?  Arizona, for example, is already on Feb. 25, so do you hold it before then, or try to push Arizona later, and how do you push them later?

Priebus has always seemed to overestimate how much control the RNC can exert over the primary calendar.

The trick is that IL has its primary on the third Tues in Mar. That date includes all partisan offices including presidential delegates. The GOP would only have to get the other Midwestern states to shift to mid March to put together a Midwest primary.

Moving IL to Feb would meet with great resistance. That was done for Obama in 2008 and it created a mess for other races in 2010. It was moved back to its traditional Mar date after seeing the effects on downballot races. The state has also been highly averse to spending on a separate presidential primary date. So if there's a joint Midwest primary in 2016 it's hard to see any date other than the Ides of March.

[barfbag]

Looks like they're shutting out their Southern conservative base. Disgusting.

How so?

[Mr. Morden]

Moving IL to Feb would meet with great resistance. That was done for Obama in 2008 and it created a mess for other races in 2010. It was moved back to its traditional Mar date after seeing the effects on downballot races. The state has also been highly averse to spending on a separate presidential primary date. So if there's a joint Midwest primary in 2016 it's hard to see any date other than the Ides of March.

According to the article linked in the OP, Priebus's intention in proposing this was to put the Midwestern Primary Day immediately after the early states of IA/NH/NV/SC, to give them more influence over the nomination process.  Presumably this means late February.  If it's late March, when the IL primary is, then it's pointless, because you're already after Super Tuesday.  So I guess what he's suggesting is that you might remove any penalties for Midwestern primaries in the last week of February, but stiffen the penalties for non-Midwestern primaries in the same window, thus encouraging Midwestern states to move to Feb. 23rd (and encouraging Arizona to move later)?

But it seems like a pipe dream.  As you said, Illinois isn't going to move that early.  Is there any evidence that other states, like Ohio, for example, are interested in moving that early?  The national party is limited in what it can do, to get states to cluster into regional primaries.  There was something of a "Northeastern Primary" in April last year, but that happened because the respective state governments actually wanted it to happen.  No evidence that the Midwestern state governments want it to happen in this case.

[Devils30]

It really isn't a bad idea for the GOP, they need to break through soon in the midwest. Need to find a place to compensate for the possible loss of Virginia's 13 electoral votes and the very white midwest is the best spot to attempt it.

[Joe Biden 2020]

As Devils said it's a great idea for the Republicans if they could achieve it, but as the previous posters have said, its next to near impossible with a heavy Democratically-leaning Midwest.  Illinois won't do it.  Ohio would be tough.  Michigan is already fairly early usually, so they're a moot point, and Minnesota would be much like Illinois, I believe, with DFL blocking any attempt in such a regional primary.  The only states that might go along would be Indiana and maybe Wisconsin on account of Republican Governor Scott Walker, assuming he gets re-elected before he has to make the decision about the primary.

[dudehere92]

I agree with having an earlier convention, but I disagree with a midwestern primary.

I believe that we shouldn't be favoring one section of the country over another.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

All in favor of a Mid-Western primary.

[Frodo]

I agree with having an earlier convention, but I disagree with a midwestern primary.

I believe that we shouldn't be favoring one section of the country over another.

According to the original rotating regional plan, each region of the country (after Iowa and New Hampshire) would be rotated every four years so each would get their turn in the limelight.  

I have no idea if that's the model the GOP here has adopted, or if they intend to keep the Midwest in the forefront in perpetuity.  

[Indy Texas]

Whole-heartedly approve!


Southern SoCons proved in 2012 that they're not responsible enough to be trusted with early primaries when they kept screwing around with the likes of Gingrich and Santorum.

So much time and money is wasted with our drawn-out primaries just to perpetuate a media circus that only damages the candidates and parties. Focus on the general election is objective #1.

Southern SoCons didn't drag that primary out. Axe-grinding One Percenters with huge chips on their shoulder did - Sheldon Adelson throwing millions at Gingrich, Foster Friess backing Santorum. They proved you can't buy an election, but you can make it needlessly more expensive and damaging to the ultimate winner by creating a spending arms race and forcing your nominee to devote money and political capital to a primary that could and should have been used for the general election.

[Vern]

Whole-heartedly approve!


Southern SoCons proved in 2012 that they're not responsible enough to be trusted with early primaries when they kept screwing around with the likes of Gingrich and Santorum.

So much time and money is wasted with our drawn-out primaries just to perpetuate a media circus that only damages the candidates and parties. Focus on the general election is objective #1.

Santorum won three of the states in the Midwest and I'm pretty sure if all the Midwestern states held their pirimary after NH Santorum would have won all of the Midwestern states except Illinois.

[CountryClassSF]

I agree with the entire premise of an earlier convention and quicker primaries. Particularly because in California we don't vote til June (Jerry Brown's doing).

But, two things stand out at me.

One, what makes them think those midwestern states are going to reject social conservatives? This is another example of the RNC trying to claim they are "big tent", but shut down their whole base. How did that work out with Romney and McCain, they have learned nothing. They want grassroots tossed overboard.

The reason why their chosen RINO Candidates didn't skate to the nomination was because they abandoned their base, and that's why we didn't show up for them in the general either. What we need is an authentic tea party patriot up there as our candidate