Jump to content
270soft Forum

Jungle Primary?


Recommended Posts

I once, in creating a scenario for some year other than 2008, forgot to move the Republican convention to the proper year. As a result, they never had a convention and therefore never coalesced around a single candidate. In fact, all the candidates were still there around election time, and each got something in the 5% range of the national popular vote. What I'm wondering is, would it be possible to use this "glitch" to make something like a jungle primary, where lots of different candidates from a single party are all running in the general election? Or maybe to simulate the ways in which the many different candidates who would be described as "independent" in a certain election aren't actually competing for a single nomination, being as they are independent? Or is it just too uncontrollable? Does anybody know? Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once, in creating a scenario for some year other than 2008, forgot to move the Republican convention to the proper year. As a result, they never had a convention and therefore never coalesced around a single candidate. In fact, all the candidates were still there around election time, and each got something in the 5% range of the national popular vote. What I'm wondering is, would it be possible to use this "glitch" to make something like a jungle primary, where lots of different candidates from a single party are all running in the general election? Or maybe to simulate the ways in which the many different candidates who would be described as "independent" in a certain election aren't actually competing for a single nomination, being as they are independent? Or is it just too uncontrollable? Does anybody know? Thanks!

You know, an election this might just work for (though a REALLY old one) is 1824, where all four significant candidates in the GE declared themselves Democratic-Republicans (you could throw in the Delaware Federalists as a throw-away second party just to make the game work), but there was no caucus or convention decision made to select one of them, or even cut down their number, by the D-R party itself. Just a thought of a constructive use of this glytch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking maybe also for something like 1860, where the Democratic Party split down the middle at its convention. Or maybe they should just have an option whereby one or more candidates losing a convention can decide to continue as independents? Or found their own party? Something. Anyway, it was awesome when it happened to the Republicans, 'cause I won every single state by overwhelming margins...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several real presidential elections in which this could work.

In 1836, there were four different Whig nominees facing off against Martin van Buren.

-William Henry Harrison ran in the Midwest and Northeast.

-Daniel Webster ran in New England.

-Willie Pearson Magnum ran in South Carolina.

-Hugh Lawson White ran throughout the rest of the South.

In 1824, there were the four different Democratic-Republicans: Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay and William Crawford.

In 1808, Vice-President George Clinton also ran for president while still running as Madison's VP nominee.

And then there are the elections from 1800 on back, if they can even be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...