Andrew Gripp Explains How U.S. Switched from Party Nominations by Caucus or Convention, to Primaries

The United States is the only nation in which the government subsidizes and mandates that any political parties choose their nominees in publicly-administered elections. Andrew Gripp has this article, explaining how party nominations worked in the United States before primaries existed.


Comments

Andrew Gripp Explains How U.S. Switched from Party Nominations by Caucus or Convention, to Primaries — 5 Comments

  1. An excellent article that superbly summarizes the evolution of primaries and the problems of them!

  2. As far as I can tell, Gripp repeats the conventional wisdom that state-run primaries were a progressive movement response to widespread manipulation of party caucuses and conventions. True as far as it goes, but he seems to ignore scholarship showing that many of party leaders themselves were also in favor of state-run primaries because they provided a more orderly and less politically costly way of resolving internal disputes. See Alan Ware, The American Direct Primary (Cambridge UP, 2002).

  3. NO robot party hack primaries.

    ONE election day — to shorten the nonstop torture of the voters in a zillion attack ads.

    EQUAL nominating petitions — to get serious candidates.

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

  4. The party hack elites have TOTAL contempt for the masses and will rig ANY thing to get and retain POWER.

    Nothing new in 6,000 plus years of ANTI-Democracy regimes of monarchs and oligarchs.

    The 1776-1787 stuff was all LATE DARK AGE stuff.

    P.R. came along in the 1820s-1840s — about 50-70 years TOO LATE — one more history DISASTER.
    ——
    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.