Resolved: On balance, a one-day national primary would be more beneficial for the United States than our current presidential primary process. (Bibliography)

[wpfilebase tag=”file” id=1208]
Background
Wikipedia National Primary. Very brief overview of the national primary idea. It includes some highlights of the criticisms of the approach.
Is a national primary a good idea?. This article highlights the debate and has links to other parts of a US News & World Report series that debates the national primary.
Reforming Presidential Nominations: Rotating states or a national primary? This article doesn’t have a lot of debate evidence in it, but has an explanation of the development of the national primary process.
National primary day? It’s getting closer . This article contains a good discussion the genera Pros and Cons of the current primary process.
Pro
Iowa and New Hampshire weild too much influence . This article makes the standard argument that a national primary is needed because early, small states have too much influence.
The case for a national primary This article contends that a national primary would increase vote turnout.
Make it stop: Let’s have a national primary. This article argues that the current primary process means candidates ignore later states.
The case for a national primary, This is a brief case for a national primary that focuses on the need to treat each state equally.
Time for one national primary . This brief article argues all states would be represented equally in a national primary.
It’s time for a national primary. This brief article argues all states would be represented equally in a national primary.
One person, one vote should come first. This article makes the simple argument that a national primary would give each voter equal influence.
We need to re-imagine our democracy. The article argues a national primary would empower all voters.

Altschuler, Bruce E. 2008. “Selecting Presidential Nominees by National Primary: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?” The Forum 5 (4): Article 5. Abstract: Despite many years of polls indicating overwhelming support for a national primary, it has never advanced far either in Congress or the parties. Opponents have claimed that it would eliminate the possibility of dark horse candidates building on early successes in small states, would dramatically increase the influence of money and mass media, weaken political parties and increase the possibility that a fringe candidate would win the nomination. This article finds that all these arguments apply at least as well to the current system. By simplifying the system, increasing voter turnout, making all votes equally meaningful and leading to a more representative electorate, a national primary would eliminate many of the serious flaws of the current system and therefore should be more seriously considered than it has been.
National Primary Overview. A comprehensive defense of the national primary that includes answers to common objections.
Is it really time for a national primary? This is a mediocre article that makes a few quick points in favor of a national primary.

Con
A national primary wouldn’t work. This article argues that a national primary would undermine more regionally diverse, less well-known candidates.
Let’s stop the trend toward a national primary . A long, general post on the primaries, but it makes three arguments against a national primary.
A national primary wouldn’t work. This brief article argues that a national primary unfairly benefits the well-known candidates.
The current primary system promotes deliberation. This article argues the current system is generally beneficial for everyone.

Resolved: On balance, a one-day national primary would be more beneficial for the United States than our current presidential primary process. (Bibliography)

Recent Posts