Anyone upset with the results of this Democratic primary, what would you do differently next time?

I would divide the country into 10 regions of 10-11 states or districts (including DC, PR, Guam, VI, Etc).

Each region would number the states from 1 to 11.

One state from each of the 5 regions would have an early primary sometime in February or March, for a total of 5 early primaries.

Each new election cycle, the early primary would go to the next state on the numbered list of each region.

All the candidates would know years in advance which states would be "early states" in any given year.

After the early primaries, we'd take a couple weeks off. The candidates would fundraise and collect support.

Then each region would have primaries in a predetermined order. The order would rotate.

Early states could have the option of holding a caucus, but none of the later states could. Primaries only would be best.

There would not be such a long break between the last primary and the convention. The season would be shorter.

I think that places with electoral votes should have input, but I'm not sure if place like Puerto Rico (a place that has debated but chosen NOT to become a state) should count.

The moron would campaign for the Republican on the Democratic side. He's voted with the Republicans every time!

Anyways,

1. no, keep the caucuses, but have them AFTER the primaries are over.

2. yes, agreed!

3. not if they can't vote in the general, sadly, their vote doesn't count

4. same day nationwide (where's five?)

6. no, we should award delegates the same as the electoral college awards votes in the general. Superdelegates shouldn't be allowed to support until the caucuses. This would be the reason for the caucus. Then they should only get half a vote of an actual delegate.

7. no, that would tick too many people off and they would claim disenfranchisement.

Furthermore, I think the electoral college votes in the general should award votes in percentages rather than giving the whole state to a candidate like the DNC does with delegates.

This would ensure the popular vote in America was heard!

I agree with all of your suggestions except #6 and #7. Trying to determine swing states is a matter of subjective analysis, which would force the party to expend resources on exhaustive demographic research and polling to determine such.

Howard Dean made a great point when asked if the primary should be held on one single election day, and his response was absolutely not. The primary gives the candidates time to showcase and sell themselves to the American people over a series of elections.

I do agree that eliminating the caucuses would be a plus, as it would make the primary more representative of the people.

I also agree with eliminating the open primary system. Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos" in Texas that carried over to Pennsylvania and Indiana was a prime example of why an open primary is unhealthy. It allows members of other parties to sabatoge the results for their own self-serving purposes.

The bottom line is this. The disastrous Bush Administration has fractured the electorate. Most people want to go in a different direction, and the competitive Democratic primary exemplified this. The primary system was put to the ultimate test, as more people voted in this primary than any other primary in history. I like the idea of allocating delegates proportionally, and I wish the Electoral College would do the same. I think the primary system would have held up fine, had it not been for the Michigan/Florida debacle.

And whether or not you support the Super Delegate system, it turns out they were necessary in deciding this primary. If neither one can clinch, as was the case with seated delegates, party leaders (supers) need to make the decision and side with who they think is best for the party.

1. Eliminate Caucuses. It is not fair to anyone who works shifts during the caucus. Also, people with children often cannot make them.

2. NO OPEN PRIMARIES. EVER. Just look at Rush Limbaugh's rude and un-American campaign to f with the Democrats and the voting process.

3. Puerto Rico and the others should be able to vote. If not, it starts to look dangerously like what England did to us before the Revolutionary War.

4. On a post a few months ago, someone suggested that each Tuesday, we have three states vote. That way, we could get through them all in 18 weeks. We might have to rotate the order they vote in, though.

If the states could be part of this process, there shouldn't be a problem which would cause them to question their voting day.

6. No.

7. No. But perhaps the swing states results should hold more weight at the convention somehow.

The delegate system was developed to resolve problems they had found. You just can't ignore that. Maybe we should get rid of SUPERdelegates.

Another huge problem was the PRESS. I mean David Plouff says the sky is falling, and MSNBC and CNN are pushing old ladies out of the way to get to shelter. Plus, then they report it like it is fact instead of spin.

(1) Agreed stick with only primaries.

(2) I'm a independent I would like to have a say in it, but if you wish to prevent something like Operation Chaos you must be a registered democrat/independent at least 3 months in advance.

(3) Yes the territories should get a say they have to deal with gov't just as the states do.

(4) I think having primaries on one day would solve a lot of problems but the idea of the stretched out campaign is so you can extensively campaign in all areas of the US and keep interest of the election in the air for a longer time. A mix, and no penalties should be imposed on voters.

(6) Stick with states. This will allow you to compete on a better level in the general election.

(7) Stick with primaries in all states/territories... But do get rid of the superdelegates.. omg.. simply..

I loved how the results ended up, but I would change some things that are not in your suggested proposals. I would get rid of the super delegates. They make it hard for the result to be based on the peoples votes. Also if states like Florida and Michigan break the time restriction set by the DNC, the result should not be in such question as it was. It should be definitive on the basis that those delegates will not be seated.

Obama '08

Does it really matter what we think. The superdelegates seem to have their hands on it. Our state voted a landslide and our superdelegate is voting in a different direction. They say every vote counts? I don't think so. Why do we have superdelegates anyway?

All I want is for there to be voting ONLY through mail-in ballots, which means voter-fraud would be less likely to occur.

Oh yeah, and no Superdelegates.

I am upset about how long the Clinton campaign lingered in this race with race baiting, embellishment of her ability to win, waste of $100,000,000 war chest. Obama entered this campaign without the negative attacking. The Clinton campaign declared the kitchen sink approach that she will throw at the convention to be Vice President.

closed primaries all on the same day or in the same week so it can really involve all of america. why do territories vote anyways next we'll have allies voting.

florida's crooked theres nothing wrong they do it on perpose. im happy with them.

everyone sees the relation betwen bush/mccain but they dont see the one bwtn bush/hillary

so we dont want the same policies but we would welcome another boldfaced liar, please

OBAMA 08