If you could change how the Primaries worked, what would you change?

I am somewhat dissatisfied with how the primaries are working. Here is what I would change and why.

1. All primaries would be caucuses. I realize that this prohibits some people from participating, but I feel that this is superior to standard voting. The reason I feel this way is simple: It increases the power of the votes of those engaged. Democracy doesn't work unless people know what is going on. Most American's are not tuned in and could not debate even minor issues. These people should not have a say in how our country is run. If you are more interested in who wins American Idol than who is President of the United States, why should your vote be equal to mine? A caucus keeps those types away because they do not want to invest the energy required. There are many other benefits to having a caucus over standard voting.

2. I believe the Democratic Primaries should be open to Republican's and Independents but I dislike how you can change your party at the door. You should have to change your political party a month in advance to caucus in a Democratic Primary.

3. I support the 15% rule. It just makes sense. If your candidate cannot get 15% then they should have to choose a second choice.

4. Someone who wishes to participate in a caucus should have to register with the Democratic Party at least a week in advance. This will allow the candidates to directly target potential caucus goers with their message. Additionally, someone who takes the time to participate in a caucus is more likely to donate to a campaign. This can be used for small donation gathering in the primary and general election.

5. All caucuses should be held at the same time. Candidates should go around the country speaking to registered and potential caucus goers in an attempt to earn their votes and answer their questions.

6. Get rid of the Super Delegates. They are designed to work against the interests of the people voting.

The democrats don't need to disenfranchise people, and this idea that we should deliberately disenfranchise some folks because the ones who wouldn't caucus are all "unwilling" to "invest the energy required" is a privileged classist position, and better left to republicans.

...employers to give time off to those who wish to caucus / vote. That should be a mandatory law.

It is not disenfranchisement if people choose not to invest their own time or energy into caucusing. It is healthy for Democracy that these people do not caucus or vote, because the worst thing in a Democracy is an uneducated voter. If voters are not educated about the issues then they are not likely to make informed choices on who to support. That in turn leads to people being elected to powerful positions in our government and taking advantage of the people. It undermines the very concept of Democracy and a government working for the benefit of the people.

Everyone should have the opportunity to vote. However, Democracy only works when people can understand what is going on and in a caucus system you ensure that the majority of people participating are those actively engaged.

again, that's a privileged view. Time off from work doesn't help people with hourly wages that can't afford time off without pay.

It doesn't help caretakers.

It doesn't help disabled people or seniors who need absentee ballots.

It doesn't help my mother-in-law who recently broke her ankle and couldn't drive - while caring for her husband who has alzheimers.

I'm always amazed at how some people can't grasp the concept that not everyone is in a position to take a day off of work or waltz off across town with no other commitments - or that not everyone can physically get there - and then blame them for being "lazy" or assuming they are too busy watching "American Idol."

Do you really not get that?

...that I realize that a caucus system disenfranchises some people? Yes, people who physically cannot go to a caucus sight (because they are, for example, in the hospital) will not be able to cast their vote.

I suppose you could combat that with allowing those people to elect to have a ballot sent to them in the mail. On that ballot they'd list their favored candidates in the order they'd prefer them. Ensure that those ballots arrive a week before the caucus, and on the day of the caucus have the absentee ballots counted. However, such ballots should be limited to those who physically cannot go to the caucus sight.

Obviously, if people have to take time off work to vote they should be paid for that time regardless. Paid leave.

And there is something very ethically wrong with you dictating who you personally think is worthy of having a vote.

We all know full well which sorts of people are most likely to be disenfranchised by this.

I'm gonna go waaaaaay out on a limb here and guess that you're a white male who is either a student or a salaried employee, who isn't stressing about whether you can or cannot make your next rent/mortgage payment, and that you are not a single dad with sole custody.

Am I right? Mostly right at least?

For me voting should always be private. There should be some number of regions, with rotating voting two weeks apart. Voting by any means available, including mail, internet, telephone, and voting places. All voting should be done on Saturday and Sunday, not a week day. Pay seniors and students to monitor and count votes. All states get a chance to be first in their turn. Conventions are bullshit party's mostly for party hacks and really kind of meaningless.

perhaps a month before the convention. There would be more time to see and hear the candidates and voters/elections would not be affected by the states who happen to go first. Of course we'd need real campaign finance reform to keep corporations and the rich from practically dictating our candidates to us. Publicly financed elections to keep all candidates on a level playing field would also be nice. Of course this won't happen until we have to dodge the pig shit coming down on our heads from above.

disqualifies a large portion of voters, a system that disallows troops overseas and other out of town on business or pleasure loss another group of voters, a system that has no provision to vote free of threats and public pressure keeps another large group away from to vote.

All of these factors, IMO, violates the Voters Right Act and are unconstitutional. I hope the Nevada Supreme Court strikes down to caucus on these grounds.

1) First of all, PUBLIC FINANCING. Without removing the corporations from the equation, all else is useless.

2) Agree with the "all caucuses" idea, especially until all the electro-fraud machines are destroyed. The New Hampshire primary settled that question beyond any reasonable doubt.

3) If you are not a Democrat, you don't get in the caucuses. Yes there are states where you don't have to register in any particular party to vote. But this is a partisan event for the purpose of selecting a party nominee (or more specifically, delegates who will select that nominee)

4) All caucuses should take place on Saturday evenings after sundown. This is so they are inclusive of the most possible amount of people. While the Jewish sabbath is from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday, I don't know of any Christian denomination which begins their Sabbath at sundown on Saturday, just Sunday only. Regrettably, there are some who have to work Saturday nights. Perhaps some sort of proxy system can be arranged for them, though obviously there would need to be a way to authenticate such proxy votes.

5) Limited number of televised debates during the Caucus season. Assuming the season starts in March, maybe 1 before, 1 or 2 during, and then 1 or 2 between the caucuses and the convention. Debates will be hosted by the League of Women Voters or some other non-partisan group. No corporate media whores will be allowed to moderate, nor will they have any input whatsoever in who is or is not "invited" to the debates.

6) As the OP said, the 15% viability rule is a sensible one. And I also agree that the "Super Delegates" are tools of the corporatist interests and should be abolished.

7) As I said, there's no reason for a ridiculously long primary season. For example, if this system were used this year, you could start with 10 states on March 1, do another 10 on each of the next 4 Saturdays and be done at the end of the month.

8) No nominee will be declared, formally or informally, until the national convention.