Why not have a lottery for which states have their primaries on which dates? The election dates can be set in advance, and perhaps not start till March or April. This way no state would be the one to always decide and we can also control how long these things go on. Its a waste of the country's time for these people to campaign for 2 years at a time.

A regional system is not, in and of itself, a bad idea, but a lot depends on the particulars.

We do need to be careful to not implement a national primary system or make campaigning in the entirety of each region possible only for well-funded candidates with big name recognition. "Retail politics" should not be completely replaced with campaigns based on advertising.

We have 50 states, so why not have 10 regions of 5 states each that rotate. I'd even be okay with letting Iowa and New Hampshire always be part of the first group.

We should have a national primary the first Tuesday of October. Then the runnoff between the top vote getters in October would be on the ballot in November.

The candidates would get one vote for every house district carried and two votes for every state carried.

This would also do away with third party spoilers.

It would be a nice change compared to the current circus with all the states squabbling like a bunch of kids trying to be the first in line

Why not just go with a national primary? Hold it in the begining of May that way the campaigns only have 6 months to beat each other up. Also we need to make the earliest filing for running be 6 months before the primary. With the internet and instant communications there is no need for 18 months of campaign ads and mud slinging.

The primary structure has its failures and benefits, but as for replacing it or restructuring it I doubt that it could be agreed on. There are just too many differing views and approaches currently that getting any consensus would be impossible.

The one thing that needs to be done is that the rules need to be legally set in place. Either under the national committees or the states. We can't have it both ways as is apparent in Florida. Howard Dean called Florida on their highjacking of the schedule. Now it is up to the courts to decide how this will play out.

As for the schedule changes, I would leave this up to the committees to wrangle out the details instead of trying to set up some mechanism or process. Because no matter how well intentioned the process, someone will find a loophole in it and take advantage. Best to let them fight it out, but keep the state legislatures out of it.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter

Let it be.

Why not have a national primary? The top two vote getters regardless of party affiliation move on to the run off.
Then in the runoff each candidate gets one vote for each congressional district carried and two votes for each state.

This does away with third party "spoilers" and makes a LOT more areas of the country count other than a few midwest swing states.

I think a regional primary or some other method of shortening the campaign season while still allowing candidates to do personal campaigning is what we need. One national primary would only favor the well-known and well-funded candidates. The method we have now, is clearly a mess. After Feb 5th, there will be no real contest and no interest until the conventions. Why have a 5 month gap? That makes no sense. Unless there are regional primaries, perhaps we should move the whole system up to starting in April or May.

Why bother tinkering around the edges? Why not move to abolish the Electoral College and go to a one-person one-vote system? That would avoid the tyranny of corn farmers in Iowa being given such undue influence in wholly national matters.