We have state electorates because of federalism, remember? Even sharing out the state votes between the parties goes against that,

So much for principles.

We’ve grown to attached to doing things the way they’ve been done for its own sake instead of actually wondering if it makes sense. The same could be said of the electoral college.

Sam, the Electoral College is part of our Constitution. It’s more than just a tradition, and it has been subject to much criticism rather than accepted mindlessly.

Direct election is what most people would prefer; it was no surprise that (as I predicted) at the conclusion of the 2000 election Hillary Clinton was the first to speak in favor of abolishing the Electoral College in favor of direct election (and many ignorant people in this country believe this is what we do currently!).

Many people prefer this for a number of reasons, which in some ugly cases is due to a contempt for federalism, but direct election makes sense and if that’s what people want, in this case I believe it should be what they (we) should get.

Obviously that is not the only way we need choose a President, directly or indirectly. Those of us who understand and still support federalism either defend the Electoral College, want something like it as a replacement, or merely enjoy the intellectual exercise of devising alternatives which dumbfound to outrage the direct-election intellectual and moral lightweights (the other direct-election people, if normal, are merely amused). An example of a replacement that honors federalism and takes us refreshingly “back” toward it would be to have the President chosen not by the Electors, but by the Governors of the states. As I have joked about this, it would be “a Pope thing,” similar to selecting a new pope.

I believe direct election will happen within our lifetime; to me what’s interesting is how the Vice President should be selected. How? Should we formally yield to the long-accomplished fact of political parties (as we would if we were to go someday to proportional representation in any major way in this country, with at-large seats) and be presented with pairs of individuals (President and Vice President) to vote, which appears to be the most practical and sensible thing? Or should we have multiple candidates in each party and the second-place finisher in the same party as the winner of the Presidency become the Vice President? Or simply let this be the newest and most important position for which the President would have the power of appointment (probably not with Senate consent)?

With direct election of the President and VP, as well as with other elections, we should be able to have multiple candidates from the parties and we should have the approval vote. We would be able to vote for as many people as we wished. A more intelligent, refined derivative which would be beyond the grasp of many and subject to too much sniping and worse would require a “maximal strategy” approval vote, which would mean one-half the total number of candidates if an even number, or the higher of the two middle values (three out of five, etc.) for an odd total number of candidates.

Imagine how a single primary-day vote or a series, as I posted about earlier, were conducted using the approval vote, where the voters could vote for any number of Democratic candidates, or any number of Republican candidates. (A variant with a series such as my five-voting-day, nine-week-long series might involve removal or the bottom finishing candidate or candidates in each primary election or “stage” or “round” of voting.)

Primaries all on the same day is just one of those solutions that makes too much sense to actually be implemented.

Yet that would be what would happen if we went to direct election of the President (and VP) and nobody has said that direct election in that situation would be impractical.

this (1990-2000, 1995-2000), this (2000-2006), this, this, and — this.

It’s lunatic.

It’s the inverse of what we’re seeing with post-season play in professional sports, where someday the World Series’s schedule may approach Thanksgiving, and winter sports like basketball or hockey (strong US domination) may approach July 4.

We may someday see primaries occur in December of the previous year before the election (this was a threat this year), or even occur before Christmas and approach Thanksgiving of the previous year someday.

What is surprising is how many other states have not yet pushed their primaries backward.

We have a comments policy below that you might want to review before you click the ‘Submit Comment’ button. Please stick to the topic and avoid attacks on our bloggers or each other.

Beyond DLS’s ad hominemizing and name calling

No such thing. Everything I posted was fully legitimate; maybe you should try being more accurate and less hateful, Shaun. (I’m surprised you didn’t add cheap shots about SUVs and big-box and chain stores, unless you believe, as you may well, that Iowans don’t have these or even know what these are.)

Where I am, obesity is well under 20 per cent and may be under 10 per cent. About all you can say is that a typical younger guy here (20s to 40s) looks like the light-haired pretty boy in a Cialis commercial.

Recall also that Super Tuesday was once the primary end all. Now it is on the verge of being irrelevant.

For that matter, why don’t we have the General Election stretched out over 3 months?

But you’re correct, not a chance.

While individual blogs attempt to go against this tide, the blogosphere as a whole is failing to counteract this malevolent influence. Blogs are most likely to be encampments of the like minded doing advocacy, ard they feed on the MSM ;as a source of ammunition in thier wars, not a souce to be gauged in terms of importance for the country.

Aginst that background, the really important topics of redistricitng, the moving of primary dates, the role of lobbyists – all get buried and forgottten.
I really do think that democracey is in danger in the US because no one is paying attention, while the media created themes take over.

200,000 white Iowans with no fashion sense and high cholesterol levels

“Dirty hippie” is more accurate than your statement.

Maybe you should think someday, for a change.

This brings me to today’s installment on an ancillary of the Iowa Idiocy and one of the more insidious aspects of the system – the way it is being front-loaded more than ever this cycle as an increasing number of states schedule early primaries.

The centrality of this paragraph merits a response; the rest of your posting, with numerous defects and misstatements, is unmerited (to be kind). “Iowa idiocy” itself is unmerited (it does not necessarily refer to having a small, non-metro-and-suburban state go first, but harkens back to some degenerate statements you made in the past about Iowans), but I wanted to leave this paragraph intact.

Megastates like Pennsylvania and Michigan, and for that matter New York, are those that are in fact “so yesterday” (they are important nowadays only insofar as sheer numbers are concerned; they tend to be not vital and are not important otherwise). Much Blue Nation territory is obsolescent (and it shows when you see old, run-down buildings and infrastructure there as well as old, mismanaged governments, taxes such as city income taxes, etc.) Florida is not only important now but will be even more so in the future. (Do you hate old people as well as white people who aren’t always “fat” as you claim them to be, in Iowa? Or do you just hate older white people?) Unlike you, I have lived and traveled all over North America, have made intelligent observations everywhere I have been, know what I am writing about, and am not immature.

(Two of the largest metro areas in this nation have no importance elsewhere any longer, have long been in this position, and are the second-largest metro areas in their respective regions, which may surprise people, but this only illustrates how unimportant and ignored they have become: Detroit and Philadelphia. They’re so unimportant few other than those of us who observe and note such things could point out that this city pair would make a fine sports rivalry, of a devilishly ugly kind.)

* * *

For years I and others have paid intelligent attention to the “leapfrogging” problem, which began with smaller states so they would not be obliterated by the larger states, and then by the larger states so they could regain some measure of clout. We have noted the “rotating regional primary” scheme that was offered recently as well as devised our own solutions, such as my idea of a nine-week, five-primary-series (spaced two weeks apart) set of elections with the smaller states front-loaded, as they must be to avoid obliteration, combined with more and more larger states as the series progresses, with assignments of states to primaries that can vary through the years so the same states will normally not be assigned the same primary in consecutive series (election years).

You can never escape the front-loading of smaller states because it’s wrong for their say to be simply overwhelmed to the point of annihilation by the larger states. This “orgy” [sic] is not simply the inverse of pro sports’ extended post-season play (not to support the sport or interest in it but simply to get more broadcast and advertising revenue). The smaller states have little choice. Aside from other remedial needs, you need to look past the very small size of Iowa and New Hampshire and their nature that is less than typical of a USA that has numerous metro areas larger than anything in those two states (notably in Iowa, which has a few cities of modest size but which is speckled with small towns), and a nation which is mainly a suburban nation.

If you are intelligent you will not only anticipate but expect front-loading, and even more of it in the future (extending backward into the year before the election year), and retention of some front-loading to protect the smaller states even if a sane system of primary elections is created someday.

The only “escape” (means of relief) for you is to abolish primaries as well as to amend the Constitution to change to direct election of the President and Vice President, unless we someday impose a sane system of primary elections.