2016 Postmortem

LWolf

(46,179 posts)

42. Most of the time,

Sat Nov 28, 2015, 07:05 PM

Nov 2015

the primaries are a done deal when my state rolls around. California has had an earlier primary for more than 3 decades. In '08, it was in February. In '96, '2000, and '04, it was in March. It hasn't been held in June since 1992. That's 34 years ago.

In 2000, Super Tuesday effectively decided the nomination; Bradley dropped out after that. CA was part of Super Tuesday.

In '04, Super Tuesday again decided the nomination, and again, CA was part of that.

In '96, Brown was still in contention in March.

Bill Clinton did not have enough delegates in '92 to have the nomination locked up until June 2nd...the date of the CA primary.

When was it, exactly, that "most of the time" the primaries were a done deal when CA got a turn?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Our primary process is way messed up: The largest Democratic state has no voice. [View all] Comrade Grumpy Nov 2015 OP

The State of CA did it RandySF Nov 2015 #1

Small states like it that way. It will be decided before we vote. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2015 #2

Yeah, it's kinda ridiculous. zappaman Nov 2015 #3

I've always thought there should be some sort of national primary day. The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2015 #4

A national primary would require immense staffing and advertising... brooklynite Nov 2015 #8

You have a point. I wish there were a better way The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2015 #11

You forget we're in the Information Age. Elections now don't Hortensis Nov 2015 #41

Let's say we put California first... CoffeeCat Nov 2015 #5

If California was first, one could make the case that ONE state has so much influence seabeyond Nov 2015 #7

How about if California voted on Super Tuesday? hedda_foil Nov 2015 #20

I have never consider this, but I am all for a national vote day, .... And none of it is staggered. seabeyond Nov 2015 #21

National voting day would benefit the moneyed candidate... CoffeeCat Nov 2015 #24

California did try that. Jerry Brown moved it back to June to save money. nt Live and Learn Nov 2015 #22

I was thinking more along the line of rewriting the California law that's the cause of this. hedda_foil Nov 2015 #23

4 tiny states should NOT have the influence it currently has. onecaliberal Nov 2015 #13

Maybe the answer is to have ten states... CoffeeCat Nov 2015 #26

In California (The candidate ATM state) the only way you'll get to meet a candidate onecaliberal Nov 2015 #27

I've met most of the Democratic candidates within the last few CoffeeCat Nov 2015 #28

We don't need a cross section of the country for the primary demwing Nov 2015 #43

Blame the State of California... brooklynite Nov 2015 #6

California is a little weird. MineralMan Nov 2015 #9

i wish we had rotating super days restorefreedom Nov 2015 #10

The podunk states will never let this happen. nt Codeine Nov 2015 #14

what would they do? restorefreedom Nov 2015 #16

And one of the first key states ibegurpard Nov 2015 #12

I think those states with the highest % of Registered Democrats should be first 99th_Monkey Nov 2015 #15

nice idea! another option restorefreedom Nov 2015 #17

Thanks. One side-benefit would be it would provide a powerful incentive to register Dems. 99th_Monkey Nov 2015 #18

quite true. the current system for sure needs improvement. nt restorefreedom Nov 2015 #19

imo, the states with highest turnout % of registered voters that turnout should go first HereSince1628 Nov 2015 #31

I really think the idea has some merit, as it incentivizes voter turn-out 99th_Monkey Nov 2015 #33

I think they could give it a trial with Iowa and New Hampshire sharing HereSince1628 Nov 2015 #35

California elections are all about media tv ads etc. nothing is stopping JI7 Nov 2015 #25

How about a series of regional primaries? Comrade Grumpy Nov 2015 #29

Same problem as a national Primary... brooklynite Nov 2015 #30

I guess I should agitate for California to vote in February. Comrade Grumpy Nov 2015 #38

CA will never get retail campaigning... brooklynite Nov 2015 #40

Well, I am the first to admit that I Karma13612 Nov 2015 #32

The only rationale for spread-out primaries that registers with me is 99th_Monkey Nov 2015 #34

I am thrilled that CA doesn't vote until June 7th. LWolf Nov 2015 #36

Most of the time, the primaries are a done deal by the time California rolls around. Comrade Grumpy Nov 2015 #39

Most of the time, LWolf Nov 2015 #42

As far as I know, there is nothing preventing California from setting a much earlier primary date. tritsofme Nov 2015 #37

Our primary "system" reeks of being corrupted. 99Forever Nov 2015 #44