Happy Independence Day!

[noblepa]

It must be exhausting.

It is.

I'd like to see a federal law saying that a primary election can not be more than 60 days before the general election. That might help a bit, but probably wouldn't solve the problem.

After the SCOTUS decision a few years ago that allowed almost unlimited corporate and other anonymous donations, we probably need an amendment to allow Congress to set limits on candidate spending. That ain't gonna happen, either.

[morrand]

I'd like to see a federal law saying that a primary election can not be more than 60 days before the general election. That might help a bit, but probably wouldn't solve the problem.

True story: in the last round of city elections in Chicago, the mayor's office was up for grabs. 14 candidates wound up on the general ballot, none of them the incumbent, and with 14 candidates on the ballot, the odds of any one of them getting a majority of the votes cast was extremely slim (and, in fact, the plurality winner only got about 17% of the overall vote). So it was pretty much a given from the start that the election would go to a runoff between the top two candidates.

The election schedule allowed for 35 days between the dates of the general election and the runoff. Unfortunately, because the state's election law changed, it also allowed early voting in the runoff to commence 40 days ahead of time. In other words, it would require the city to begin collecting votes in the runoff about five days before completing the vote to determine who would be in the runoff.

Chicago has a certain reputation for funny business in elections, but this was asking a little much. The election board's response (on p. 20) was, in effect, "Oh, f*** it, we'll get to it when we can." They did, and wound up making a fair bit of history in the process.

I can see something similar happening if the primary were limited to 60 days before the general: elections take time to count and certify, and then of course you have to go through the nominating convention, etc., before you can actually know whose names to print on the ballots.

[longdog]

To me and I suspect almost every other British person the whole concept of the US primaries is bizarre beyond belief. The whole idea that a morally bankrupt, repeatedly bankrupt, lying, cretinous, adulterous, bigoted, corrupt, narcissistic, incompetent oaf who thinks the War of Independence was won at the airports (just as hypothetical example) could buy his way into a party's candidacy regardless of whether he was even slightly qualified for office or wanted by the party is incomprehensible.

[Gregg]

All good points, and I'd love to continue this discussion, really I would.
But even for the UK Forum, we're getting a little too close so I'm going to lock it before we end up with chimpanzees swinging from chandeliers, unmentionable acts involving ping pong balls, butter, and automotive upholstery.

Anyone interested in more, PM and I can tell you where this discussion belongs.

GBE

Topic Locked