On January 24, the Republican National Committee approved the changes in the presidential nominating process that the party’s Rules Committees had adopted the day before. See this story. The date of the 2016 national convention isn’t set yet, but the article suggests it is most likely to be in June 2016. The date will be set in April 2014.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
It’ll be interesting to see how this affects the timetables set by states.
Also, I think the early nomination is a mistake. Casual voters, even potential primary voters really don’t want to have to think about the general election before summer.
In New York they keep moving back deadlines.
I think earlier timetables disenfranchise smaller parties because they create a situation where candidates need to raise more money more frequently by the time the election rolls around.
More ARBITRARY aka LAWLESS machinations by the rightwing gang of statist control freaks.
The rule is ABC except if it XYZ on certain days of the week when the moon phase is such and such — party HACKS at work.
Abolish the ENTIRE EVIL STINKING MESS from Hell.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
These changes are actually quite positive The GOP primary contest has never REALLY lasted more than a couple of months in recent history. Nothing is being given up here.
If you define the party nominating period as February-June, I think there’s a much greater chance of the media allowing things to play out without the usual hyperactive rush to declare a presumptive nominee.
The best bit, by far, is requiring states before March 15th to award delegates proportionally.
Much greater chance of a contested convention. Or just sparks at the convention.
The extreme pressure to drop out early and rally behind someone will not be as much of a factor. Had these rules been in place in 2012, you have to wonder if Gingrich and Santorum would both have stuck it out to the convention. The Ron Paul folks would have had a lot more gas in the tank if the convention had been in June.
For minor party watchers, we may see more candidates who start in the GOP primaries and go third party. A scenario where a hard-core cultural conservative Congressman takes his 50 or 100 delegates into the June GOP convention. Then, storms out and accepts a July 4th nomination from the Constitution Party.
Lots of interesting possibilities and new dynamics open up.
“For minor party watchers, we may see more candidates who start in the GOP primaries and go third party.”
Just a personal prejudice: I don’t consider candidates who primary with the major parties and then bolt, and then seek minor party nominations to keep their campaign going, to be particularly helpful to the smaller parties that they seek nominations from. If anything they’re bad for those parties because although they may bring some energy to the smaller party for a while they inevitably suck all that energy away again when they bolt back to the major party that they’re more authentically affiliated with.
If you look back at any third party campaigns that have achieved any element of success in the last 100 years, the roots generally come from a failed campaign in one of the major party primaries.
Roosevelt in 1912. Wallace in ’68 came from a failed Democratic bid in ’64… and he nearly forced the election into the House of Representatives. A scenario that could have given segregationists the power to select the president. And the list goes on: John Anderson, Eugene McCarthy. In 2012, Gary Johnson… a candidate who actually appears to be sticking with LP thus far.
I’d rather see a party like the LP or CP get a jolt of energy and attention from a big name candidate than to nominate a little known figure with no hope of breaking into the national conversation.