To What Degree Is The Presidential Primary System Beneficial/Harmful?

[DrNewGod]

I'm posting this independently of the Politics Thread because that Mardi Gras Parade has got so many floats throwing candy, it would be tough to get a coherent sense of the replies.

I saw a news post saying Buttigieg is getting dogpiled in NH in response to his (shocked the hellouttame) strong performance in Iowa. I recall some previous candidate's comment that you know you're the frontrunner when you keep getting buckshot in the ass (imprecise quote, I'm sure).

Now, assuming that a party's goal is to nominate a candidate that will win the presidency, how good of an idea is it to basically have them perform Act 2 of The Godfather? Doesn't that merely leave them with a buncha scars'n'burns for the other party's candidate to poke at? I don't blame that for HRC's 2016 defeat, but she came out of that nomination donnybrook looking more like Cap tightening his shield in Avengers: Endgame than Thanos coming for The Mind Stone in Avengers: Infinity War. On the other hand, this kind of open sausage-making has some merits over the old, pre-Eisenhower-Smoke-Filled-Room-Convention process.

So, thoughts?

Oh, yeah. Please be nice. I know brass knuckles and pointy objects are the norm in political discourse these days, but let's go easy on each other.

[JCAll]

It certainly favors the incumbent, since the opposition will devour themselves, but the idea of letting people vote on who they want to put into the national election isn't a bad one.

[Kirby101]

I'm posting this independently of the Politics Thread because that Mardi Gras Parade has got so many floats throwing candy, it would be tough to get a coherent sense of the replies.

I saw a news post saying Buttigieg is getting dogpiled in NH in response to his (shocked the hellouttame) strong performance in Iowa. I recall some previous candidate's comment that you know you're the frontrunner when you keep getting buckshot in the ass (imprecise quote, I'm sure).

Now, assuming that a party's goal is to nominate a candidate that will win the presidency, how good of an idea is it to basically have them perform Act 2 of The Godfather? Doesn't that merely leave them with a buncha scars'n'burns for the other party's candidate to poke at? I don't blame that for HRC's 2016 defeat, but she came out of that nomination donnybrook looking more like Cap tightening his shield in Avengers: Endgame than Thanos coming for The Mind Stone in Avengers: Infinity War. On the other hand, this kind of open sausage-making has some merits over the old, pre-Eisenhower-Smoke-Filled-Room-Convention process.

So, thoughts?

Oh, yeah. Please be nice. I know brass knuckles and pointy objects are the norm in political discourse these days, but let's go easy on each other.

As Churchill would say it is the worst process to do it, except for all the other ones.
It can be ugly and rough, but it is Democratic. Having Party Elders pick the nominee is not a thing we want.

[Tami]

I wouldn't worry about theh 'Dogpile'. In 2016 the complaint was that there were too few candidates. In 2020 the complaint is that there are too many candidates.

I'm actually in favor of the conflict. For me, seeing how well as Candidate handles the conflict, how well they can take it and how well they can dish it out is a measure of how strong they will be.

I want a President who can look Putin in the eye and make him wet his pants. I want a President that gets' respect, for all the right reasons when it comes to our allies But who also puts the fear of America in the hearts of our Enemies.

A strong America needs a strong leader, not a laughing stock guy like Trump.

[Kirby101]

If there was a stronger GOP candidate in 2016, we might have been spared Trump. The field was a joke. Rubio was a light weight, nobody ever liked Cruz and !Jeb turned out to be dumber than his brother.

[DrNewGod]

If there was a stronger GOP candidate in 2016, we might have been spared Trump. The field was a joke. Rubio was a light weight, nobody ever liked Cruz and !Jeb turned out to be dumber than his brother.

Which takes some doing.

[DrNewGod]

I wouldn't worry about theh 'Dogpile'. In 2016 the complaint was that there were too few candidates. In 2020 the complaint is that there are too many candidates.

I'm actually in favor of the conflict. For me, seeing how well as Candidate handles the conflict, how well they can take it and how well they can dish it out is a measure of how strong they will be.

I want a President who can look Putin in the eye and make him wet his pants. I want a President that gets' respect, for all the right reasons when it comes to our allies But who also puts the fear of America in the hearts of our Enemies.

A strong America needs a strong leader, not a laughing stock guy like Trump.

Carville made a point recently on how Dems who have ideas that might win were squeezed out by the process. Related question, could a Lincoln have risen in our current system? Was Clinton our last Dark Horse to take the race?

[Zauriel]

John Kerry won 51 out of 57 contests in the 2004 Democratic presidential primaries and couldn't beat Bush in the election.

Howard Dean was seen as the front runner in the presidential primaries, but he won only two primaries including his home state and he lost to Kerry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_D...tial_primaries

Biden was regarded as the apparent front runner but he finished 4th place in Iowa Caucus.

[KnockBlock]

As Churchill would say it is the worst process to do it, except for all the other ones.
It can be ugly and rough, but it is Democratic. Having Party Elders pick the nominee is not a thing we want.

Why the party system is a fraud. Enjoy the 8 minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0BxFFv7fxA

[JCAll]

John Kerry won 51 out of 57 contests in the 2004 Democratic presidential primaries and couldn't beat Bush in the election.

I don't think anyone was going to beat Bush in 04. He was riding high on that "criticizing the president is unamerican" wave.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Why the party system is a fraud. Enjoy the 8 minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0BxFFv7fxA

"Both sides" is not a compelling argument. I liked her, she has charisma and good stage presence. Maybe in a decade we'll see her on Fox News.

[Zauriel]

I don't think anyone was going to beat Bush in 04. He was riding high on that "criticizing the president is unamerican" wave.

That is correct. Bush united all Americans in the aftermath of 9/11. Economy was still strong on Bush's watch. Bush's tough guy image and hawkish foreign policy was popular with the American people who were convinced that he could keep them all safe. The war in Iraq was going on for only three years when the elections began in 2004. The anti-war sentiment didn't grow until after the 2004 presidential elections when the war in Iraq reached its fourth year anniversary.

In short, No democratic candidate could beat Bush.