If I were given the choice of having one national primary or a series of regional primaries, I would choose to have a series of regional primaries. I think that the way that we do election/ primary season currently works very well. I feel that having a number of primaries (all of equal importance) spread out of the campaign season helps for candidates to gain momentum and for voters to have a chance to get to know each candidate and their platform better. If there was only one national primary, I feel that many people may not vote because, similar to a presidential election, they would feel that their vote would not make a difference. I think that spacing out primaries also makes it easier for candidates to prepare and campaign in each state, making each state feel important. A single national primary would make it nearly impossible to plan campaign strategies.
I would also choose having a series of regional primaries rather than a national primary. A national primary would make it harder and more expensive for candidates competing against each other, the candidates that aren't very well known wouldn't stand a chance because they wouldn't have time to build up support like they could with regional primaries. Regional primaries allow the voters to feel that their votes really matter, they can use the data from primaries before them to see which candidates are in the lead. I feel that the regional primaries are more personal and give the states and the people time to prepare for the their turn to vote and decide which candidate they wish to support.
While I agree that our primary system works just fine right now, I disagree and say that a national primary would work better than regional primaries. A national primary could be held right before the party conventions, giving the candidates enough time to campaign and rally voters. I believe that one national primary would take less time and be less of a hassle for vote counters. I believe that it would be more efficient and that it could help raise voter turnout rates since it is a national primary and not just a regional or state primary where they might think that their vote does not make a difference.
I agree with Eli in that having a National primary would be the way to do things because having the primary be national, not only do you increase turnout, you have a less areas being focused on by a specific candidate and has them appeal to the nation as a whole which I believe is the trait of a true president, using the entire population's opinion to lead and be elected.
If I were given the choice of having one national primary or a series of regional primaries, I would choose to have a series of regional primaries. I think that the way that we do election/ primary season currently works very well. I feel that having a number of primaries (all of equal importance) spread out of the campaign season helps for candidates to gain momentum and for voters to have a chance to get to know each candidate and their platform better. If there was only one national primary, I feel that many people may not vote because, similar to a presidential election, they would feel that their vote would not make a difference. I think that spacing out primaries also makes it easier for candidates to prepare and campaign in each state, making each state feel important. A single national primary would make it nearly impossible to plan campaign strategies.
ReplyDeleteI would also choose having a series of regional primaries rather than a national primary. A national primary would make it harder and more expensive for candidates competing against each other, the candidates that aren't very well known wouldn't stand a chance because they wouldn't have time to build up support like they could with regional primaries. Regional primaries allow the voters to feel that their votes really matter, they can use the data from primaries before them to see which candidates are in the lead. I feel that the regional primaries are more personal and give the states and the people time to prepare for the their turn to vote and decide which candidate they wish to support.
DeleteWhile I agree that our primary system works just fine right now, I disagree and say that a national primary would work better than regional primaries. A national primary could be held right before the party conventions, giving the candidates enough time to campaign and rally voters. I believe that one national primary would take less time and be less of a hassle for vote counters. I believe that it would be more efficient and that it could help raise voter turnout rates since it is a national primary and not just a regional or state primary where they might think that their vote does not make a difference.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with Eli in that having a National primary would be the way to do things because having the primary be national, not only do you increase turnout, you have a less areas being focused on by a specific candidate and has them appeal to the nation as a whole which I believe is the trait of a true president, using the entire population's opinion to lead and be elected.
ReplyDelete