People like simple ballots, freedom of association, and no vote splitting, but enough choices. Suppose this is on your ballot for you to vote on in your state: Each party or group holds private conventions with their own rules and invitees and is not funded by the tax payers. They don't have to let party registrants vote in them. Parties winners and independent candidates pay a fee high enough (higher when no incumbent) to attract 5-8 candidates to an open state pre-election. Party names will be listed after each candidate. Voters regardless of political affiliation may vote for any candidates. If there are more than 4, they may vote approval for up to 2 each, 3 being spoiled. The top 2 go to the general ballot. Is that better or worse than your current system? Likely your state has tax funding for private popular primaries that exclude voters they don't want. Then many political parties are on the general ballot with the threat of splitting each other's votes.
California has a similar primary, except conventions don't choose candidates. Multiple candidates from each party show up on the ballot, splitting each other's votes. Voters only caste one vote each. The top 2 go on the general ballot, even if from the same party. Under my method, a convention could run 2 candidates, but likely would not. The 2 votes lets parties run 2 candidates, lets indecisive independent voters edge their bets, and encourages candidates to be the 2nd choice of voters outside their base. However, it might run afoul of the "one person one vote" rule except maybe if worded carefully. Maybe the rule means everyone gets an equal number of votes. Do you think the 2 votes per person in the pre-election has much benefit? I also think the fact is a pre-election might get around the rule.
No, that design is entirely to make selections made entirely by party insiders and favoring the wealthy. Anyone should be able to vote in primaries with direct selection of the candidates. Those candidates who earn delegates select their own delegates. No delegate may change their vote for the first ballot. After this, no delegate may change his/her vote unless freed by their candidate to do so and then must vote how their candidate directs the delegate to vote for the 2nd and 3rd ballot. Each vote, the candidate with the least votes is removed for the choices. This continues until only 1 candidate is left, and that then is the party's nominee. Within the states, delegates are proportioned solely upon the percentage of votes each candidate receives. No winner-takes all, no-extra delegates for having the most votes in a state and it is on a state-wide basis, not upon Congressional districts. There are no super delegates. And the rules established at the conclusion of the previous convention - state and nation - can not be changed in the next convention until after the candidate is selected. To qualify for ballot placement, a 3rd party would need to have either received 10% of the vote in the previous general election or obtain petition of at least 5% of the registered voters of the state at least 30 days prior to voting beginning. Independent candidates who wish to appear on the ballot in a state's general election would need a petition of at least 5% of registered voters 30 days before voting begins. However, anyone who is eligible to be president could run as a write-in candidate.
You just described the presidential election, which works within the electoral college winner take all. I was referring to legislature and Senate and house of reps races. Since 8+ people can run, I think that would break the party leadership monopoly and allow more parties.
just to make it simple id just kill all caucuses and convetnions and make it primaries. Open or close up to the state. nice simple and can be done asap.
People can hold conventions whether you like it or not. Would you outlaw people meeting in their own homes to decide which of 5 people they want to throw their support behind? The only thing the state can do is maybe fail to honor a contract prohibiting the losers from running in the primary that season. As for voter primaries, some voters (marijuana lovers) like Ron Paul types in one house and Bernie Sanders types in the other. Forcing them to choose a party greatly limits their vote. That why I say let all candidates run together, voted on by everyone, and send the top vote getters to the general ballot.
