Sue Everhart proposes, and the RNC rejects, a streamlined primary in 2016

In Phoenix, members of the Republican National Committee on Thursday rejected a proposal by Georgia GOP chairman Sue Everhart to streamline, for 2016, a long and tortuous primary process that some think have placed Republicans at a disadvantage this year.

From the New York Times:

[Everhart] suggested changes that would have allowed states to hold winner-take-all contests in 2016, potentially bringing the contest to a close more quickly.

But several members spoke in opposition to her proposal, saying the current process gives more voters an opportunity to participate in the nomination by creating a lengthier process.

“The thought has been for 20 years to try to create a process which keeps us from having a one-day primary in which you have the man on the white horse winning and then you wake up with buyer’s remorse,” said John Ryder, a committee member from Tennessee.

Everhart, curiously, was a major champion of ousted RNC chairman Michael Steele, who has cited the lengthy primary as a signature accomplishment during his tenure as chairman.

- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

12 comments Add your comment


April 19th, 2012
6:05 pm

The current system is better in that it takes away a lot of the Iowa and New Hampshire outsized impact. The most populous states of California, New York, etc. are not having a say even now.

Maybe the states (like GA) will bunch more together with “Super Tuesdays”, so more of them have an input.


April 19th, 2012
6:15 pm

Iowa, NH and SC have too much say (at least some of the time) and certainly have too much attention for their respective populations.

The country should be divided into 4 regions (12-13 states) with a similar electoral vote total. They should not be divided georgraphically. Hold each primary 3-4 weeks apart. Next election cycle, the order changes.


April 19th, 2012
6:53 pm

@ kreedham – That sounds pretty logical. Geographical or single state primaries lead to pandering.

Smaller states want to be early and have their own primary day for obvious reasons. If they get lumped with several bigger states – they will be bypassed. There will probably be some sort of a hybrid. Weird that CA, TX, NY, PA, and NJ are in the top 11 states by population, yet have no say this year now that it is over. Under the current system, only if the race is tight will the May and June primaries have meaning.


April 19th, 2012
7:16 pm

it will be a tortuous 2016 election for the gop, maybe the worst ever for the party when hillary steamrolls their candidate

Serious Robuck

April 19th, 2012
7:19 pm

Kreedham, great suggestion!! Good luck getting the powers-that-be to consider it. The current system frustrates us all, no matter what our politics, but it all seems cast in stone.


April 19th, 2012
7:19 pm

Many people, like myself, would like to see a one day primary. We are tired of long drawn out political seasons where the candidate can pander to the various factions in the various primaries. They also tend to, then, contradict themselves on several fronts. But worst of all, they continually give fodder to the Left to use against themselves, while greatly depleting the war chest funds. Can you imagine how much more money would be available to use in the Presidential battle? Remember, that the mainstream news media is more biased toward the Left than it is toward the Right. Make the long term battle be against the President, not each other.


April 19th, 2012
8:35 pm

It is hardly a matter of the process. It is Repugnant fanaticism, the propaganda, the lies, the rabid and the poisonous bites into the American psyche. America could just as well become a one party state. At least Democrats wake up and shoot each other sometimes, so we do have an internal process for switching out Democrats.

Look before I leap...

April 19th, 2012
9:07 pm

The problem with 4 or 5 super Tuesdays that are geographically widespread is that it heavily favors the candidates with a large war chest from the get go.
In addition to amassing delegates, the primary process is also about fund-raising.

In the current GOP slate, there would have been only one viable candidate who was funded well enough to compete at the outset.

I’d rather not have my choices limited to those who have a bank book with a lotta zeros in it.

In addition, it is not a bad idea to road test the candidates a bit and have them take a few hits in order to expose any critical weaknesses. Better to know about those before the general than have your butt handed to you in November.

My observation is that the GOP field was weak this year.
2 letches, one who has not held office for 13 years and one who has never held public office
A moonbat.
A guy who had was socially conservative, but fiscally liberal.
A pale imitation of the prohibitive favorite.
A libertarian disguised as a Republican.

It’s depressing.


April 19th, 2012
9:12 pm


April 19th, 2012
8:35 pm

You are absolutely nuts. GHWB, Dole, McCain and Romney are not conservatives. GWB was a little conservative. There has not been a Republican Conservative running for President since since Reagan. Clinton was more conservative the Dole, McCain and Romney.

Glenn Roberts

April 20th, 2012
4:24 am

Have to agree with Ramzad. The GOP seems to be coming up short on qualified “constitutional conservatives”. It has taken the liberals 5 generations to move the educational and judicial system into their program of social justice (Their word for Socialism/Communisn/Marxism). Will conservatives sit on the sidelines and complain or will they get off their butts and get active toward changing the current system? That is the most important question of the day.

Aaron Burr V Mexico

April 20th, 2012
1:33 pm

@Totally Disgusting – “You’re absolutely socialist! Shrub, Viagraman and Etch a Sketch are not Holy Pure Tribe Members. Shrub was a little bit Holy Pure Tribe Member. There has not been a Holy Pure Tribe Member running for Puppet since the Gipper. Can’t Keep It In His Pants was more Holy Pure Tribe Member than Shrub, Viagraman and Etch a Sketch.”

Translated that for you.

The Snark

April 20th, 2012
2:26 pm

You guys crack me up with your veneration of The Gipper. If Reagan was alive and running for office today, Grover Norquist would be demanding that he repudiate all the his tax increases he signed (remember those?) and he’d be on the Limbaugh show doing his best to disavow the earned income tax credit (remember that?) But you and the Tea Partiers would still skin him alive and throw him in the garbage pit as a RINO, while pining away for a “true conservative.”