Skip to main content

Republican presidential candidates former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (L) tries to get Texas Governor Rick Perry to stop talking during Romney's time answering a question during the CNN Western Republican presidential debate in Las Vegas, Nevada, O
GOP thinks less of this will solve its presidential problems
Via Jamie Dupree, the Republican Party is on the verge of adopting a new set of rules aimed at compressing its presidential nomination calendar for 2016:
National Republicans meeting in Washington, D.C. this week are ready to ratify an accelerated primary and caucus selection system for 2016, a move that would give the GOP nominee an extra two months to focus on the general election.

The plan before the Rules Committee of the national GOP would set the Republican National Convention in either late June or early July of 2016, which would be the earliest GOP gathering since 1948.

Under the plan, the GOP nomination battle would also start later than it did in 2012 or 2008—February, instead of January, and even then, outside of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, no state could hold a binding contest until March. That means almost all primaries and caucus would take place from March to May, shaving two months off the 2012 calendar.

Please read below the fold for more on the GOP's new calendar strategy.

The goal here seems to be to correct the perceived flaws of the GOP's 2012 primary process, including the fact that holding an earlier convention would allow the nominee to start raising general election money earlier in the year. Combined with the GOP's plan to limit primary debates to friendly media outlets like Fox News, a shorter calendar also aims to limit the nation's exposure the clownshow that the Republican presidential nomination has become, especially if there's not a competitive Democratic primary.

But as I wrote last month, I'm skeptical that these sorts of process changes will yield the results party leaders desire. First and foremost, the GOP's problem is that the reason it comes off like a freakshow is that it is a freakshow. Yes, Mitt Romney won the party's nomination, but he only won it after selling his soul to the GOP's right. In the end, that's really what his problem was.

In fact, as damaging as the debates were to the GOP brand in 2012, and as bad as it may have been for them to have a drawn-out nomination process, I don't think it's clear that Romney would have won a short battle with fewer debates. For Romney, the debates were a curse and a blessing: They allowed his rivals to soar, one-by-one, but just as methodically, Romney used the debates to destroy his opponents after they took flight. If there had been fewer debates and a shorter schedule, Romney might not have had the opportunity to dismantle his rivals and the GOP could have ended up with a Rick Perry or Newt Gingrich as its nominee. And as bad a candidate as Romney was, he was still the GOP's best bet.

Ultimately, however, it probably doesn't matter what the GOP does—except insofar as the GOP nomination process really does make for great political theater. If the GOP wants to be competitive in presidential elections, it's going to need to do a lot more than simply change its nomination process. It's going to need to change what it stands for. And there's no sign of that happening.


Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Less time... (32+ / 0-)

    ...for candidates to say stupid things make gaffes.  

    I'm not always political, but when I am I vote Democratic. Stay Democratic, my friends. -The Most Interesting Man in the World

    by boran2 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:48:08 AM PST

    •  Except to me, less time and fewer debates just (8+ / 0-)

      means the batshit crazies will simply condense the same amount of batshit crazy into a smaller window of time across fewer debates in order to appease their ravenous batshit crazy base more quickly.  They can't NOT be batshit crazy.  That's who they are.  You can't make a zebra stop having stripes.  Get your popcorn, this going to be like watching the same 2012 GOP election freak show, except via DVR, where we can get all the same juicy content, but in much less time.

    •  It needs all new candidates (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      avsp, Calamity Jean, nadd2

      and, as the diarist said, entirely new policies.

      The problem is not the number of debates. The problem is who is debating.

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

      by anastasia p on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:53:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wouldn't Dems also have to advance convention? (0+ / 0-)

      It seems to me that if Repubs hold their convention in July, Dems will likewise be forced to advance the date of their convention to match Repubs.

      Two reasons A) holding an earlier convention would allow candidates to start raising general election money earlier in the year.  One party can't really afford to allow the other party to have a months' long headstart in raising general election funds; and B) most conventions give the party a bump in the polls and additional press.  One party cannot allow the other party a months' long advantage in press coverage and polling numbers.  

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 12:03:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think that rationale is that important now (0+ / 0-)

        A big part of the reason the parties moved the conventions back, IIRC, was that Bob Dole ran out of money from the "primary" part of the matching funds pool, but was unable to use the general election part of the pool, since the GOP hadn't held its convention yet.  Clinton, on the other hand, had plenty of money, and was buying TV spots to weaken Dole.

        Since the new rules are almost always "fighting the last war", the GOP and also the Democrats moved their conventions close to Labor Day.

        The financing picture has substantially changed, and neither party uses the matching fund system any more.  And Citizens United makes this even worse.  So there's no way that the GOP will "go dark" due to a lack of public money.

        Given the lack of this constraint, they figure ending the Freak Show a few weeks earlier might be pretty appealing.

        Quote of the week: "They call themselves bipartisan because they're able to buy members of both parties," (R. Eskow, Campaign for America's Future.)

        by mbayrob on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 12:59:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! (23+ / 0-)

    I want endless GOP mudslinging! I want as much of their circus act as possible to clog the airwaves and suck money from the Kochs and the other megadonors!

    More crazy statements about "binders full of women" and "we built wrecked that!"

    There are lies, damn lies, and statistics but they all pale in comparison to conservative talking points.

    by ontheleftcoast on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:49:04 AM PST

  •  The Less Exposure (10+ / 0-)

    to the public the better.  

    "The Trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat." attributed to Lily Tomlin

    by uniqity on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:50:30 AM PST

  •  So...what yer sayin Jed is that someone is in (4+ / 0-)

    control of the GOP.

  •  This won't help and could hurt ... (13+ / 0-)

    as bad as Mittens was, he was a tougher opponent than anyone else the else in the field (including Huntsman) and a shorter calendar could have left the Rs with a worst candidate against Obama.

    The problem isn't with the calendar, its with the positions and frankly their own base.

    •  Getting harder for the GOP to hold back the crazy (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Steve In DC, Chitown Kev, GAS, MPociask

      McCain won it, but it wasn't a cakewalk like for GWB. Romney really had to pull out the stops to get the nomination. I would still bet an establishment candidate like Christie gets the nomination in 2016, but it's even-money at best.

      When the GOP loses again in 2016, I predict the Republican primary voters go full TP for 2020. Only after an epic '64-style beatdown will the crazy tide begin to recede.

      •  They HAVE no "establishment" candidates (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Calamity Jean

        Christie is burnt-to-a-crisp toast, and Jeb is a non-starter everywhere but the media who are only mentioning him for the same reason he's not viable: his name.

        I don't think the Tea Party will concede THREE times before going crazy. It's going to be next time. The GOP is all out of ammo. Electoral ammo, that is. They have a little too much of the other kind.

        Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

        by anastasia p on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:57:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Not too tough (0+ / 0-)

      What won the primary for him was he was able to outspend (by millions) the other candidates.

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:28:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  did they want mittens? (0+ / 0-)

      While Romney won, and the people who are not tea baggers or the right wing base of the GOP thinks that was the best possible outcome, didn't many in the GOP want a non-Romney? Wasn't Romney seen as the the centrist pick?  Don't you think that many in the GOP believe that they lost the presidency because a long battle selected Romney?  Couldn't the rational be that a shorter process would select a more conservative candidate that would energize the base and win the election?  Like Santorum, for instance.

  •  The Crazy Oozes Out Regardless. (8+ / 0-)

    Hiding the Batshit will not work, the true scent of the GOP will escape. Like rotten potatoes. Unless they can do it all on a Saturday between 1 and 3 PM.

  •  hmmmm. not sure sure this will go well for them. (5+ / 0-)

    To paraphrase Princess Bride:

    There you go again, using that phrase "shorter and better nomination process".

    I'm not sure it means what you think it means.

    The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. - Albert Einstein

    by ERdoc in PA on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:53:08 AM PST

  •  How can we hide the fact that all of our (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, xaxnar, JeffW, skohayes, Dodgerdog1

    candidates are loony-fucking-toons and shouldn't be in charge of a daycare center, let alone the USA?

    How do we convince the lesser races we don't look down on them?

    And how do we convince womerns that we aren't misoginis...misojynist.. trying to be mean to them or nuthin?

    It's hard work.

    Legal means "good".
    [41984 | Feb 4, 2005]

    by xxdr zombiexx on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:54:09 AM PST

  •  i think this is good for the Blue Team (9+ / 0-)

    a shorter calendar means it is more likely that some extreme tpotty affiliated candidate will get the nomination sewn up early.

    there will be no time for a more reasonable candidate to catch on who might appeal to voters in the middle

    Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
    Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

    by TrueBlueMajority on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:54:23 AM PST

  •  That's 2 less months of multi-campaign media buys (5+ / 0-)

    But I guess since the corporate media is all right-wing anyway, they'll graciously take one for the team.

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:55:14 AM PST

  •  As I said last time, this is about money (15+ / 0-)

    The nominee can't touch money contributed towards the general election (i.e., everything from double-max donors) until he or she has been nominated at the Convention; this gives them that money that much sooner.

    In 2012, the Romney campaign had to take out a $20M bridge loan in August, using the general election funds as collateral, in order to have any kind of cash flow. Their inability to spend that general election money allowed Obama et al to pound them on the Bain stuff all summer, while Romney was also unable legally to signal to the outside groups that he wanted those attacks rebutted.

  •  A shorter season will help a well funded candidate (6+ / 0-)

    I think that is what the establishment is looking for, i.e. well funded = establishment candidate.

    Definitely short popcorn companies.

    The highest form of spiritual practice is self observation with compassion.

    by NCJim on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:55:50 AM PST

  •  " bad a candidate as Romney was, he was still (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ky DEM, BobBlueMass, Calamity Jean

    the GOP's best bet."

    The thing is, the GOP doesn't believe that.

    "Get over it...and get out of the way." -- Gov. Steve Beshear (D-KY)

    by mspicata on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:57:04 AM PST

    •  Some are saying they need him again... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      ...after Christie's scandals. And Romney has been staying in the public eye. He could end us skewing, and screwing, their short season plans, and lose again.

      Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

      by JeffW on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:31:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hey Jed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Collideascope, Calamity Jean

    Rick Santorum came in 2nd with Ron Paul 3rd in delegate count.

    Santorum even won ever important Iowa.

    Otherwise, I agree wholeheartedly with your Diary.

  •  Cut the entire presedential campaign (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    merrywidow, MPociask

    on both sides. I am in favor of both parties agreeing to cut both the primary and general election season & no camapaign except tin these months.

    Primary Season: April-June. April campaign and debates. May- June all primaries, divide by regons.

    No campaign debates or ads until general election season.

    General electiin Season: August-November: August conventions. October campaigning.
    November elections.

    General election 3 days, one day a holiday.

  •  I still want an answer from CNN for this... (7+ / 0-)

    The CNN RNC Debate from September of 2011 when each republican lunatic was introduced like a WWE fighter entering the ring.

    Or the fact they let Michelle Bachmann give a SECOND "tea party" response to the State of the Union after the first republican response, even though Bachmann is a member of the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

    CNN needs a creative colonic.  What a disgrace.

    •  Gad, that was classic (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Typical right winger screw up, she ended up looking in the wrong camera for the entire speech:

      @SamFeistCNN: Bachmann was looking into the Tea Party Express camera instead of the network pool camera. Fox News was pool.

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:35:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  She was looking at the camera for "her" people, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        which are the ones she cared most about, and ignoring the majority of the viewers, about whom she cared less.

        This was her own 47% moment, showing her priorities clearly.

        Spending all your time in gerrymandered districts and at fundraising events with your donors doesn't equip you to deal with the average national voter.

    •  Wasn't it CNN... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      That also did "Hand-raising" as debate?

      What a bunch of jokers.

      Here's an idea, if you've got a crowded field.  Pick one topic.  Don't let the candidates know about it in advance - mayybe let them know the list of available topics, which should number into the hundreds.

      Instead of a debate, make the person talk about the topic for roughly fifteen minutes - far longer than their talking points can hold out.  The moderator then becomes a critical interviewer - testing them on points and their knowledge, and cutting them off of rehearsed stories.  

      The idea isn't to see how well they do at Jeopardy, but to see how they think, how they come up with positions, how they present ideas.  If we really want to know somebody, let's see them talk about something for a while.  Incidentally, I think that something could just as easily be their view on Shakespeare or plate tectonics.

    •  Hey, I could get behind that sort of introduction (0+ / 0-)

      Primary debates are god-awful slogs. Maybe get Michael Buffer to introduce the candidates (including name, nickname, hometown, height, weight, and win-loss record in campaigns), play some kick-ass introductory music, maybe some light shows and pyrotechnics as they enter, and "Let's get ready to debate!" Get an overall corporate sponsor as well and maybe one for the moderator, like ESPN Friday Night Fights has Just For Men and Tecate. Get somebody to record a debate plan for each candidate as well and run it before the debate.

  •  More time.... (0+ / 0-)

    for whatever fragile coalition that the nominee will have to put together to sit and bake in the summer sun. The balancing act between the far right and the extreme far right of the party will be really hard to keep up for that long until the election.


    "I know the meaning of life. It doesn't help me a bit."

    by dss on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:00:56 AM PST

  •  Presuming We Leave Our Convention Till 2 Months (0+ / 0-)

    later, because it wouldn't be bipartisan to leave them without a general election advantage....

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:01:53 AM PST

  •  OT, perhaps, but that's a BEAUTIFUL screencap (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    that I don't recall seeing before.

    It's like that split-second before a fatal incident on Jeopardy.

    Righteousness is a wide path. Self-righteousness is a bullhorn and a blindfold.

    by Murphoney on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:02:20 AM PST

  •  It will certainly help to some degree (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Collective memories are so incredibly short.  Look at how Romney rose in the polls as he etch-a-sketched his way to the middle.

    A shorter primary season also means less time for their candidates to slip and reveal their true natures.  What if there are fewer debates and Rick Perry doesn't have his brain cramp?  Or Herman Cain's sexual misconduct doesn't come to light in time?  And so forth.

  •  -Koch Brothers et al: (0+ / 0-)

    "Yeah that Clown Car thing was really embarrassing....The revolving door just went round and round....."  Things that make you go hmmm.....

    "Seek above all for a game worth playing- such is the advice of the oracle to modern man." - Robert S. de Ropp

    by FuddGate on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:05:01 AM PST

  •  GOP feels the lesser they are heard, the better... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sagansong, JeffW

    The last thing the GOP needs is a lot of exposure on a national level, cause it then becomes more difficult to hide their TRUE agenda and policies...

  •  What's not being discussed... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fladem, skohayes, John DE, JerryNA

    Is the base going to go along with this?  Or the individual states?  They are basically telling their base, 'you are too crazy to drag out this nomination process'.  And they are telling the states, 'you have to conform to our schedule!'.  I know that several states, like Colorado, do not like to pay for party primaries - therefore they have to be caucuses run by the parties.  The GOP establishment is looking externally, but I bet this pisses of their internal infrastructure.

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck

    by RichM on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:05:43 AM PST

  •  What will their calendar look like? (0+ / 0-)

    Seems like they are also compressing the damage done by outlier tea party types in the smaller more retail states which have stronger tea party grassroots GOTV success.  This reduces the impact these "upstart" candidates can have on the anointed outcomes.  If Rand Paul wins in Iowa but it's sandwiched in the same week as Florida and Virginia or Pennsylvania, who cares?  

    "Out of Many, One Nation." This is the great promise of the United States of America -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:06:00 AM PST

  •  The shorter calendar could be devestating to GOP.. (6+ / 0-)

    I say this because a shorter calendar is far more likely to end up with a candidate who is vetted far less than the longer calendar, leaving them with a candidate wide open to an open race assault they are not prepared to handle.

    It also opens the door for an insurgent, tea party campaign to quickly light fire, and before it can be blunted run a few states an gain momentum.

    A quick calendar only really works if there is a presumptive of party control that can guide through a hand picked candidate who has an insider straight.. Republicans have no one like that

    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle

    by Chris Reeves on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:06:21 AM PST

    •  Yes... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      A quick calendar only really works if there is a presumptive of party control that can guide through a hand picked candidate who has an insider straight.. Republicans have no one like that.
      The GOP is an expanding universe with no center, no edge, and no preferred point.

      Is that a real poncho, or is that a Sears' poncho? - Frank Zappa

      by JoesGarage on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:30:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  An alternative proposal (0+ / 0-)

    GOPers are just nibbling at the edges of their problem by limiting the duration of their primary season.  Sure, cutting off a month or two of national exposure to the goggle-eyed insanity that marks practically every GOP presidential candidate might help a bit come the general election.  But to really get the intended effect, the GOP ought to require each candidate to wear a ball-gag in his/her mouth and a paper bag over his/her head for the duration of the primary season. Admit it, GOPers.  You've got a huge problem that cries out for a radical solution.

  •  Don't look too closely at our candidates... (2+ / 0-)

    or our policies, or our platform, or listen to anything we say.

    Thank you, and have a very BenghaziIRS day.

  •  What the public can't see won't hurt the GOP. (0+ / 0-)

    This is the best they got?

    Only Punxsutawney Phil can save us now.

    by jwinIL14 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:09:03 AM PST

  •  Heh. The result of this might well be (6+ / 0-)

    a brokered convention.  Imagine a GOP compromise candidate on, say, the tenth ballot.  

    The real problem this idea presents to the GOP is exactly what they're trying to prevent: uncertainty.  A shortened calendar increases the risk that no one sews it up prior to the convention.  

    "Get over it...and get out of the way." -- Gov. Steve Beshear (D-KY)

    by mspicata on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:10:01 AM PST

  •  they're probably right. (0+ / 0-)

    "Legalizing pot won't make more pot-smokers. It will just make less criminals. - Me

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:11:04 AM PST

  •  It's just a thought.. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sagansong, skohayes, BobBlueMass

    But maybe better ideas and better candidates and a little sanity thrown into the mix would work better?

    Dear future generations: Please accept our apologies, We were roaring drunk on petroleum -Kurt Vonnegut

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:11:29 AM PST

  •  I think a right metaphor for this would be: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ramrodding the candidates to see who sticks to the wall.

    Righteousness is a wide path. Self-righteousness is a bullhorn and a blindfold.

    by Murphoney on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:13:05 AM PST

  •  This is Pretty Transparent No? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    1.) Fear of Extremism Choosing Candidates

    2.) Fear of discourse and Candidate's funds being used for anything other than attacking D's

    3.) Three through 100, control over Choosing Candidates and the Media Narrative.

    •  Also, is it just optimism or (0+ / 0-)

      Does it seem like this is ripe to backfire. We talk today about who is basically running.

      If I am an outsider that sees my message is going to be stream-lined. Limiting my debates and chances to have actual voters decide, I am going to start distinguishing myself as early as possible.

      That is now you will have those who keep Boehner up starting months before and perhaps more chaos.

      Is there also a certain cynicism here that if the D's did this it would echo the sentiment that they are (and elections, Obama, or McCain's failure, show well they aren't) kingsmakers at the top.

      Or do they just not want Maccacca moments until it's too late? This may be exciting as it is just extremely cynical and in no way does what the idea of a primary is - showcasing perspectives (and I suppose shows a bit of knee-jerk reaction to and fear of the extremism maybe they can't control).

      The media will matter now far more. Who owns them. Go figure.

  •  I've got a simple suggestion for the GOP (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Before the primary season starts, put them through a Tough Mudder style challenge round, top three finishers get to take it from there.

    And to make it more fun, have the press do the course with them.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:18:22 AM PST

  •  They risk the opposite. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skohayes, John DE, JerryNA

    In 2012 Romney was constantly fighting a game of a whack a mole.  As one fringe candidate came in danger of overtaking hi he'd unleash his millions and bury them in a vicious media campaign.  He had time to recover from every loss and "right" the ship.  Yes it moved him to the right as he accused Santorum of being too pro-gay rights and Rick Perry of being too pro-immigration but without the time to mount a counter attack to neutralize his less wall street friendly foes he risked defeat.

    The lady was enchanted and said they ought to see. So they charged her with subversion and made her watch TV -Spirogyra

    by Taget on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:19:08 AM PST

  •  smart move... less time for the crazies (0+ / 0-)

    to fully ripen.

  •  nail on the head... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    ...after all of the hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth by Republicans, and all of the pretend discussions by them about what they should do, you hit the nail on the head toward the end of the diary above: The Republican Party seems both unwilling and unable to change. They have gotten themselves into a bind where they are constantly doubling down on the very things that people dislike most about them as a party. They don't really want to change. And they don't seem capable of it, either.

  •  Here is the GOP strategy in a nutshell: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bananapouch1, JerryNA, Calamity Jean

    1) Shorten the clown car demolition derby that is the primary season.

    2) Select a candidate who will only give speeches to friendly crowds and only talk to Fox News.

    3) Gerrymander the debate locations/sponsors to have as few as possible while making sure they are on friendly ground.

    4) "Work the refs" to insure that the moderator(s) is timid and afraid to ask any real question.

    5) Unleash rivers of dark money from anonymous PACs to run attacks ads accusing the opposition of everything from treason to molesting baby bunnies.

    6) Unleash rivers of dark money from anonymous PACs to suppress the minority and poor vote.

    7) Election.

  •  Dems should do this too (0+ / 0-)

    Its ridiculous to have primaries on Jan. 3rd -

    put it all between March and May.

  •  If they keep nominating evil clowns (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    from Ayn Rand Hell, it just won't matter.

    May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

    by oldcrow on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:37:18 AM PST

  •  GOP- the less you know about us the better (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    The GOPers know that they dont come close to winning a national election on a level p[laying field if the American people are informed and allowed to vote, so it makes sense to come up with the two prong tactic they seem to have adopted

    1) Limit the number of voters as much as possible

    2) Keep the true nature of our candidates (and their legislative  goals once elected) as secret as possible

  •  Hidden issue? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Given that the GOP candidate is usually much more reliant on max donors to fund their campaign, does adding 2 months to the general campaign risk them running out of funds late in the game, when their donor pool is tapped out?

    In the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

    by Cixelsyd on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:47:47 AM PST

    •  We can hope. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ...does adding 2 months to the general campaign risk them running out of funds late in the game, when their donor pool is tapped out?  
      I fear, however, that their donor pool is so rich that it can't be tapped out?  

      "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." -- Sen Carl Schurz 1872

      by Calamity Jean on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 01:18:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I don't think it Matters (0+ / 0-)

    Go Ahead and shorten the Schedule.

    No Matter what they Do, there will Always be plenty of
    Video Tape of the GOP displaying teh Stupid in Public.

    If We ever run out of New Material, We can  Just Play
    the "GOP Greatest Hits" Tapes from 2012.

    It's not as IF the GOP Base is smart enough
    to notice anything.

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:52:30 AM PST

  •  They already have a problem (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    Some of the GOP's biggest shining lights are already taking a hard nosedive -- look at Governors Christie and McDonnell.

  •  If the circus isn't as lengthy, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    fewer people will see the clowns.

    "Remember, Republican economic policies quadrupled the debt before I took office and doubled it after I left. We simply can't afford to double-down on trickle-down." Bill Clinton

    by irate on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 11:07:50 AM PST

  •  The Democrats should have their convention (0+ / 0-)

    a week or two after the Republicans.  It will be so much more fun then the Republicans for we Democrats like to party.  Most likely Hillary will be our nominee and thus Democrats will be making HISTORY to presidential elections in a row with America's first African-American president and America's first female president.

    President Obama, January 9, 2012: "Change is hard, but it is possible. I've Seen it. I've Lived it."

    by Drdemocrat on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 11:16:03 AM PST

  •  That way they can sneak Chris Christie in (0+ / 0-)

    Who else is there really. Huntsman? He doesn't pay ball good with the Kochs and the other oligarchs.

  •  Rearranging deck chairs (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    2012 was a clown show because they were all clowns.

    Frankly i think it makes it more likely they end up with a Santorum. Remember, if Iowa GOP hadn't bungled the vote count Santscrotum would have had momentum going into NH, not Romney. As it was Ricky came close to beating Rmoney. He made Rmoney spend every nickel to eke out wins, even in Michigan.

    If Ricky'd had more money and the teappers had gotten beyond him after Iowa, he would have won the nomination.

    Nobody, so far, has Rmoney's money. Or organization. If a teapper wins Iowa, and starts running the table, there is precious little time for the corporates to rally.

    It was that long primary season that kept all the teappers in the race, instead of uniting behind one candidate.

    Methinks the teappers pick one nut to go with this time. And win.

    Peace on Earth was all it said.

    by BobBlueMass on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 11:54:33 AM PST

  •  Won't work. Some states will break out. (0+ / 0-)

    In 2012, it was also supposed to start later, until Florida changed its date to jan 31 or so and all other states followed and changed their dates back. I don't see this stopping the convoluted process.

  •  The GOP deserve all they have reaped! (0+ / 0-)

    They allowed the nut cases to take over their party for a few votes, but lost many more voters in the process.

  •  PRIMARIES (0+ / 0-)

    I would like to see primaries held over a nine week period with ten states voting together separated by a week.  States would vote in the order they either approved the Constitution or were admitted into the Union.  It would look like this:
    Week 1:  DE  PA  NJ  GA  CT  MA  MD  SC  NH  VA
    Week 2:  pass  all even weeks are pass
    Week 3:  NY  NC  RI  VT  KY  TN  OH   LA   IN   MS
    Week 5:   IL  AL  ME  MO  AR  MI  FL  TX   IA   WI
    Week 7:  CA  MN  OR  KS  WV  NV  NB  CO  ND  SD
    Week 9:  MT  WA  ID  WY  UT  OK  NM  AZ  AK  HI

    •  I like the states voting in quadrants to minimize (0+ / 0-)

      cross country jetting.

      Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

      by 88kathy on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 01:17:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  IMO the rules committee is overestimating their (0+ / 0-)


    They talk about shortening the nomination process, but the attack ads keep starting earlier and earlier.  And the candidates keep beginnning fundraising events and campaigns earlier and earlier.

    I suspect the ads and campaign events have more impact on voters than the formal schedule.

  •  That's funny... (0+ / 0-)

    They're trying to shorten the process not because they want a better candidate but because they want to hide their crazy. Is there anyone here that doesn't believe that if indeed they shortened their calendar, they wouldn't have gotten a less damaged Romney, they would have probably gotten a less ready Santorum, or one of their other crazies that wouldn't have peaked until after they won the nomination. Can you imagine that "oops I can't remember the third dept. I'd close down," from Perry in July after winning the nomination? It would be a glorious gift from which he'd never recover. The President was going to win re-election handily anyway, but he just might have actually swept the table and ran a Boston for those that understand Spades if he had the likes of that dummy as his challenger.

  •  The Traveling Republican Clown Circus (0+ / 0-)

    Will be just as entertaining no matter how hard they try to bury it.

    "Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?" - General Jack D. Ripper

    by wilder5121 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:20:43 PM PST

  •  Incredible GOP Cluelessness (0+ / 0-)

    Does anyone else find it incredibly ironic and hilarious that the GOP has settled on a strategy that assumes that the less the public sees of their candidates, the more acceptable they would find them?  That's basically what they are saying...  with fewer opportunities for the cadidates to expose their thinking, biases and utter cluelessness, the GOP thinks they can foist one of their "shining stars" on the public.  If these yahoos cannot survive the vetting process known as the presidential primary season, how on Earth can they expect them to perform at anything approaching acceptable levels in the REAL office of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ???

  •  The problem with this strategy is that (0+ / 0-)

    even if the GOP had a bench (or even one) candidate who wasn't a whack-a-doodle, there is really no controlling the media the way there used to be, even back in the GW Bush era, and I think a lot of the RNC operatives are strategizing based on the Reagan era.  There are now too many people with video cameras filming speeches that wind up on youtube with millions of hits.  And given that they only have whackadoodle candidates, every nutty thing they say will be out there, regardless of the number of debates or the length of the primary season.  What really sank Mitt wasn't what he said during debates, or even during the public portion of his campaign -- yes, there were some silly gaffes, like his knowing NASCAR because he knew NASCAR owners and his new-found adoration of grits -- but I think he could have survived that if the 47% stuff hadn't surfaced, and that was in a supposedly "private" fundraiser.  There is no more controlling the message and getting a doofus or wing-nut elected any more.  You actually have to have a candidate that won't say stupid sh*t, because there is no hiding it any more.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site