# What if we abolished primaries? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 10, 2015, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776 "2015-07-10T15:42:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![davida03801](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5e925/32.png) [@davida03801](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davida03801)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2015, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776/21 "2015-07-12T13:52:50Z")
Why not go back to smoke filled rooms ? ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2015, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776/22 "2015-07-12T14:03:04Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > Why not go back to smoke filled rooms ? You say this facetiously, but, there is something to be said for the old smoke-filled room. Specifically, the candidates put forward would (usually) be both competent and competitive. While the primary (and to a lesser extent, the caucus) is more democratic, it also tends to select attractive ideologues, who may or may not do well in the general election, and who may be an utter disaster once in office (pick the example of your choice). I’d like to see a combination - use the smoke-filled room (with less smoke and more transparency) to winnow the field, and then use the primary to make the final selection. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2015, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776/23 "2015-07-15T19:40:53Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > The last major instance of this was the special election for California Governor. There were… a hundred candidates(?), from every party except Britain’s Raving Monster Looney Party, and quite a few independents. Some android won… a guy who almost certainly could not have carried a regular election and proceeded to screw up the state pretty thoroughly. Er, if he didn’t win the 2006 “regular” election for governor, then who did? > [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > I don’t know how many states have open primaries, but even California has only dabbled in it once or twice before going back to closed voting, entirely on what is (IMHO) the spurious notion that cross-voting will upset an election. I was under the impression that California still has open primaries for all partisan offices except President - and one reason for that is, when they started the open Presidential primaries, somebody pointed out that the Rules of the Republican Party said that a primary cannot be used to determine a state’s delegates to the national convention if anyone who was not a registered Republican at the time could vote in it. The solution at the time was to allow two counts - one including all voters, and one counting just registered Republicans; the latter was used for delegate selection. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2015, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776/24 "2015-07-16T14:44:25Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > Why not go back to smoke filled rooms ? You say that like it’s a bad thing. > [@pkbites in post #9](#): > > If the solution is to return to the days of “smoke filled back rooms”, I say so be it! ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2015, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776/25 "2015-07-16T15:06:21Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Clarke is NOT a Democrat. But he is forced to run as one as no Republican would get elected Sheriff in Milwaukee County at this time. The winner of the Dem primary for Sheriff always wins the general. > > A lot of otherwise Republican voters crossed over and voted for Clarke in the Democratic Primary. You say _this_ like it’s a bad thing. If the alternative is to have no political voice at all, I don’t see any problem with crossover voting. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2015, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776/26 "2015-07-16T15:38:42Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > I don’t see any problem with crossover voting. If you actually intend on voting for the candidate in the general election (when you normally don’t vote for his party) that’s one thing. But if you’re doing it simply to try to skew who is on your opposing parties ballot, that is unethical. My example of David Clarke was in response to **Amateur Barbarian** asking for evidence of cross voting affecting an election. Whether you think it’s a good or bad thing, it does happen and I have shown that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-abolished-primaries/724776.md?page=1)