Reformation of the Nomination PAC

[LibertyIn08]

This is just a feeler, seeing what people's opinions are:

1. What do you think is the preferable method of allocating delegates for the primary? A general straw poll with a convention system, a caucus system, or some other method?

2. Do you wish to see some other voting method, such as IR or Approval voting?

3. Is it a good idea to attempt to standardize the allocation and nomination method across the nation, as to enable better transparency within the Republican party and to eliminate confusion as to the leaders?

4. Do you support a mandate to continue debates as long as there is more than one candidate actively campaigning?

If we can reach a quorum on these issues, it may be useful to start a PAC to lobby the state GOPs to change the procedure and allow for more open processes.

Any other ideas are welcome and encouraged, but I think election reform is required for the long term health of the party and the movement.

[LibertyIn08]

Bump for the night.

[Kludge]

1. What do you think is the preferable method of allocating delegates for the primary? A general straw poll with a convention system, a caucus system, or some other method?

One person, one vote. Eliminate delegates, and take the national # of votes to select the nominee.



2. Do you wish to see some other voting method, such as IR or Approval voting?

I would accept Instant Runoff voting... I wouldn't mind a scorecard type of voting either, where you give a 1-3 vote (One by default if you vote but leave a candidate blank) and then the votes are counted that way.

Edit: The "Exhaustive Ballot" would also be favorable, where candidates are eliminated until someone hold the majority.



3. Is it a good idea to attempt to standardize the allocation and nomination method across the nation, as to enable better transparency within the Republican party and to eliminate confusion as to the leaders?

*shrugs* I don't mind state parties choosing how they run their own system, so long as it meets my approval ;)



4. Do you support a mandate to continue debates as long as there is more than one candidate actively campaigning?



No. The party should fund enough debates to get all of the major issues covered and leave it at that.

[LibertyIn08]

One more bump or two for interest, and if not, I'll let it die for the time being.

[nate895]

One person, one vote. Eliminate delegates, and take the national # of votes to select the nominee.



I would accept Instant Runoff voting... I wouldn't mind a scorecard type of voting either, where you give a 1-3 vote (One by default if you vote but leave a candidate blank) and then the votes are counted that way.

Edit: The "Exhaustive Ballot" would also be favorable, where candidates are eliminated until someone hold the majority.



*shrugs* I don't mind state parties choosing how they run their own system, so long as it meets my approval ;)




No. The party should fund enough debates to get all of the major issues covered and leave it at that.

Never get rid of the delegate system, and never put in the popular vote as the decider. Ever heard of something called "states' rights."

I personally like the idea of regional primaries and approval voting. That way we don't have to radically change the ways we count votes (for approval voting) while we still get an accurate picture of who people approve of. I like the regional primary (with a few small states (5 EV or less) going before everyone to give lesser known candidates a chance, based on a lottery then rotation), it gives each region a say, and it is manageable for campaigns to handle.

[LibertyIn08]

Never get rid of the delegate system, and never put in the popular vote as the decider. Ever heard of something called "states' rights."

I personally like the idea of regional primaries and approval voting. That way we don't have to radically change the ways we count votes (for approval voting) while we still get an accurate picture of who people approve of. I like the regional primary (with a few small states (5 EV or less) going before everyone to give lesser known candidates a chance, based on a lottery then rotation), it gives each region a say, and it is manageable for campaigns to handle.

Good to hear; I'm glad that people are getting behind approval voting as both a democratic and scientific method of electing the best candidate.

Which of the regional primary plans do you support? Would it be best to tackle the reformation issues at a state level and put the regional primary plan second on the agenda?

By the way, if we used the name above, it'd be the RON PAC. :P

[nate895]

Good to hear; I'm glad that people are getting behind approval voting as both a democratic and scientific method of electing the best candidate.

Which of the regional primary plans do you support? Would it be best to tackle the reformation issues at a state level and put the regional primary plan second on the agenda?

By the way, if we used the name above, it'd be the RON PAC. :P

LOL

I am not sure if there is a specific one, but I like the regional one that 18 Secretaries of State put out, but I would change so Iowa and New Hampshire wouldn't be the first states all the time.

[LibertyIn08]

Here's an interesting reform, although I approve of the rotational regional primary that the SoSs supported.

http://politicalgrind.com/2008/01/08/a-better-way-to-choose-a-president/

[LibertyIn08]

Bump for the day crowd.

[nate895]

Here's an interesting reform, although I approve of the rotational regional primary that the SoSs supported.

http://politicalgrind.com/2008/01/08/a-better-way-to-choose-a-president/

That sounds better than we have now, but it is kind of a weird system to work out. It'd almost be boring since the same states would go each week.

Personally, I'm thinking about trying to get Constitution Party, Libertarians, Independent Conservatives, and Conservative Republicans to get together and form their own party and start to win elections for REAL conservatives, and not have "moderates" or liberals meddling like they do in the GOP primaries.

[LibertyIn08]

That sounds better than we have now, but it is kind of a weird system to work out. It'd almost be boring since the same states would go each week.

Personally, I'm thinking about trying to get Constitution Party, Libertarians, Independent Conservatives, and Conservative Republicans to get together and form their own party and start to win elections for REAL conservatives, and not have "moderates" or liberals meddling like they do in the GOP primaries.

Fusion tickets would go a long way to helping Third Parties win seats.

[nate895]

Fusion tickets would go a long way to helping Third Parties win seats.

I'm talking about completely wiping them off the map and just making them factions within a larger Conservative Party.