We and the GOP have significantly different primary systems, each with advantages and disadvantages. I think that we can get a better result with a semi-combination of the two systems.
First, I'll cover what I see as the strengths and weaknesses of each current system, so you'll understand where I'm coming from. This will be a little long, so bear with me.
The Democratic Party primary is essentially a proportional representation system, about 65% of the delegates divided within congressional districts and the rest by state-wide totals. Due to the relatively low number of delegates per Congressional district, this usually means someone has a huge remainder of effectively uncounted votes, but that's not really a solvable problem.
Strengths: It does a fairly good job of reflecting the popular vote. The system uses the same rules, or nearly the same, for awarding delegates for every state.
Weaknesses: In even moderately close races, like the one we have this year, getting a nominee early will be difficult, due to the closeness of delegate counts in even fairly large popular victories. Basically, the system we have is not that great at actually definitively picking someone as the nominee.
The Republican Party primary on the other hand, has no set system for each state, so individual state rules can vary pretty dramatically. Many of the them are winner-take-all, some are various versions of proportional representation.
Strengths: The winner-take-all primaries do an excellent job of getting to a nominee quickly.
Weaknesses: The winner-take-all primaries do a poor job of representing the wishes of the voters, especially in a more-than-two person race. For example, McCain won all of Florida's delegates with 36% of the vote. In a one-on-one race, I don't think McCain would beat Romney for the GOP nominee, but it would certainly be at least closer.
My proposal: A proportional representation scheme with a winner-take-all cut off point. Basically, take our current system and add two rules: 1)If any candidate takes 60% or more of the total state vote, they get all of the state-wide delegates. 2) If any candidate gets 60% or more of a congressional district, that candidate gets all the delegates for that congressional district.
The way I see it is that this works fairly well for both one-on-one races, because it should divide the delegates more sharply than the current system, and doesn't really change the way a multiple candidate race would work, as no one is taking 60% with more than one other viable candidate and having any real chance of losing anyway.
This should have the strengths of both systems: Fairly representative of the vote and quickly settling on a nominee, without the weaknesses of either. I think. I could be missing something. Also, I'm not committed in any way to the 60% number. That was just felt about right on first reflection.
Thoughts?