Just wondering if this is required anywhere. It seems to me though I’m probably wrong the primary system leaves the Democrats and Republicans sort of at the mercy of New Hampshire, because if you don’t win or come in second your support dries up.
Which leads me to the point why let one state basically decide who your candidate is?
To me the Democrats will nominate candidates that aren’t electable by the time the general election rolls around.
That was the reason I thought of this tread, but my question is “Do the Republicans or Democrats HAVE to use a primary?” I believe they didn’t always do this back in the 1800s did they?
Plus I don’t know about other states but where I am you are allowed to choose what ballot you want in the primary Democratic or Republican. So if I’m a Republican I could easily ask for the Democratic ballot and vote for the weaker candidate so when the General Election comes I know he can’t be the Republican.
I don’t know about other states but that is how it is here.
Is there anything to stop the Democratic or Republican Party to say, we won’t hold primaries we are choosing who we think can win and we won’t hold elections for primaries
Before the 20th century the US political parties chose their candidates at the party conventions, by politicians striking deals in smoke-filled rooms. No primaries.
I expect an American will be along shortly to fill in the details, but no, there was no requirement to hold a primary in those days and probably none even today.
The primary didn’t always exist. At the turn of the 20th century, it was seen as a progressive reform. Before most states had primaries, candidates were chosen at the convention. As late as 1968, the Democrats had a chaotic convention fight between Hubert Humphrey and Eugene McCarthy. Following that debacle, the Democrats decided that delegates should be chosen by binding primary. The Republicans did the same. The result has been jockeying by the various states to make their primary the “important” one.
You are describing an “open primary”, which is not used in all states. In some states, you have to vote the primary of the party you are registered with, and you don’t get to vote for candidates in the primary if you are registered independent.
The pros and cons of open primaries are a subject for GD.
State law generally determines whether and when states hold presidential primaries. If the legislature of a particular state chooses not to conduct a primary, then the political parties themselves will organize caucuses to elect delegates to their national conventions. Thus we have the familiar Iowa caucuses which lead off the nominating season. About 15 other states hold caucuses as well. In a few states, the legislature gives the parties the option of whether to hold a primary or caucus, so you will occasionally have a state in which one party holds a primary and the other doesn’t.
Note that the national parties have little say in this; we moved toward greater emphasis on primaries not because of a conscious decision by the national parties, but because more and more state legislatures decided primaries were a good idea.
Please note that there is no constitutional requirement that we have a popular vote to select the electors sent to the College that selects the President, let alone primaries to select convention delegates! :eek: