Evaluate the view that the presidential nomination process is ineffective (30)
Every four years, American presidential candidates compete in a sequence of state contests to
gain their party’s nomination. This political process is one of the most expensive and
complicated in the world. The presidential process includes invisible primaries, primaries,
caucuses and national party conventions. Invisible primaries are sometimes effective at
narrowing down the candidates- but this didn’t happen in 2016 and 2020. It should also pick a
candidate that is likely to win the primaries and eventually the election, which was successful
with Obama in 2008, but it picked a losing candidate with Mitt Romney in 2012 and 2008.
Primaries are even less effective as they are very exensive and have a very low turnout.
National party conventions are no longer relevant, as the President is known months before the
convention. Overall, the presidential nomination process is ineffective, shown by the low
turnouts and inconsistency of effectiveness between elections.
Invisible primaries are meant to be effective in narrowing down the candidates, but in 2016, it
didn’t do this- there were still 17 candidates so Trump won as he was the most famous. It is also
meant to pick a candidate that is likely to win the primaries and the election- the Republican
Party did pick a winner in 2016 (Trump), and in 2008 (Obama). But, it picked a losing candidate
with Mitt Romney in 2012 and 2008, and invisible primaries are irrelevant when the president is
incumbent. Invisible primaries are the period of time between a candidate’s expression of
interest in running for president and the start of the primary season. During the invisible primary,
candidates will raise money and gather support through campaigns. They try to create a feeling
of inevitability of winning surrounding them. The invisible primary selects only the likely
candidates before the primary- normally there are only 7-10 runners left in the race. It generally
does this job well, however, in 2016, it didn’t do this job well- there were still 17 Republican
candidates remaining, and in 2020, there were over 20 Democrat candidates remaining. This
helped Trump to win as he was the only famous candidate. More electable candidates drop out
due to lack of interest in the media, poor opinion poll showings or lack of campaign finance
donations, which can lead to much more controversial and problematic candidates winning, like
Clinton and Trump. In 2018, Hillary had raised over $90 million before the primaries even
began, and due to her money, organisation and opinion poll lead, this put off Joe Biden and
Elizabeth Warren. The invisible primary should also select a winning candidate for the primaries
and the election. This was successful for the Democrats in 2008, because the leaders of the
invisible primary, Obama and Clinton, went on to dominate the actual primaries, and Obama
went on to win the election. However, in 2008, it was led by Mitt Romney, but the primaries were
won by McCain- securing the Republican presidential nomination, but losing the election. In
2012, it was again led by Mitt Romney who was not liked by many Republican supporters as he
was seen as a ‘flip-flopper’ and lost the primaries again, showing that invisible primaries are
ineffective at choosing a winning candidate for the primaries and the election. Invisible primaries
are also irrelevant when the candidate is incumbent, as they are already selected- like with
Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2020. Overall, invisible primaries are sometimes effective at
narrowing down the candidates- but this didn’t happen in 2016 and 2020 as there were still
many candidates remaining. It should also pick a candidate that is likely to win the primaries and
eventually the election, which was successful with Obama in 2008, but it picked a losing
candidate with Mitt Romney in 2012 and 2008. The invisible primaries are irrelevant when the
president is incumbent, showing that they are mostly not effective.
The second stage, primaries, should be effective at choosing the most representative nominee,
boosting participation, and selecting a winning candidate who would make a good president.
Primaries are when each state votes to choose a party's candidate. It has been effective in
increasing the level of participation by ordinary voters; in 2004 it was 14% whereas in 2016 it
Every four years, American presidential candidates compete in a sequence of state contests to
gain their party’s nomination. This political process is one of the most expensive and
complicated in the world. The presidential process includes invisible primaries, primaries,
caucuses and national party conventions. Invisible primaries are sometimes effective at
narrowing down the candidates- but this didn’t happen in 2016 and 2020. It should also pick a
candidate that is likely to win the primaries and eventually the election, which was successful
with Obama in 2008, but it picked a losing candidate with Mitt Romney in 2012 and 2008.
Primaries are even less effective as they are very exensive and have a very low turnout.
National party conventions are no longer relevant, as the President is known months before the
convention. Overall, the presidential nomination process is ineffective, shown by the low
turnouts and inconsistency of effectiveness between elections.
Invisible primaries are meant to be effective in narrowing down the candidates, but in 2016, it
didn’t do this- there were still 17 candidates so Trump won as he was the most famous. It is also
meant to pick a candidate that is likely to win the primaries and the election- the Republican
Party did pick a winner in 2016 (Trump), and in 2008 (Obama). But, it picked a losing candidate
with Mitt Romney in 2012 and 2008, and invisible primaries are irrelevant when the president is
incumbent. Invisible primaries are the period of time between a candidate’s expression of
interest in running for president and the start of the primary season. During the invisible primary,
candidates will raise money and gather support through campaigns. They try to create a feeling
of inevitability of winning surrounding them. The invisible primary selects only the likely
candidates before the primary- normally there are only 7-10 runners left in the race. It generally
does this job well, however, in 2016, it didn’t do this job well- there were still 17 Republican
candidates remaining, and in 2020, there were over 20 Democrat candidates remaining. This
helped Trump to win as he was the only famous candidate. More electable candidates drop out
due to lack of interest in the media, poor opinion poll showings or lack of campaign finance
donations, which can lead to much more controversial and problematic candidates winning, like
Clinton and Trump. In 2018, Hillary had raised over $90 million before the primaries even
began, and due to her money, organisation and opinion poll lead, this put off Joe Biden and
Elizabeth Warren. The invisible primary should also select a winning candidate for the primaries
and the election. This was successful for the Democrats in 2008, because the leaders of the
invisible primary, Obama and Clinton, went on to dominate the actual primaries, and Obama
went on to win the election. However, in 2008, it was led by Mitt Romney, but the primaries were
won by McCain- securing the Republican presidential nomination, but losing the election. In
2012, it was again led by Mitt Romney who was not liked by many Republican supporters as he
was seen as a ‘flip-flopper’ and lost the primaries again, showing that invisible primaries are
ineffective at choosing a winning candidate for the primaries and the election. Invisible primaries
are also irrelevant when the candidate is incumbent, as they are already selected- like with
Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2020. Overall, invisible primaries are sometimes effective at
narrowing down the candidates- but this didn’t happen in 2016 and 2020 as there were still
many candidates remaining. It should also pick a candidate that is likely to win the primaries and
eventually the election, which was successful with Obama in 2008, but it picked a losing
candidate with Mitt Romney in 2012 and 2008. The invisible primaries are irrelevant when the
president is incumbent, showing that they are mostly not effective.
The second stage, primaries, should be effective at choosing the most representative nominee,
boosting participation, and selecting a winning candidate who would make a good president.
Primaries are when each state votes to choose a party's candidate. It has been effective in
increasing the level of participation by ordinary voters; in 2004 it was 14% whereas in 2016 it
