Rescheduled Contests Megathread

[Storebought]

The DNC should put a rule that says that if states postpone their primaries to a date so close to the convention (within ten weeks or so) that it guarantees disorderliness, then those states should forfeit their delegates and the number needed for a majority should accordingly drop.

[Storebought]

The DNC should put a rule that says that if states postpone their primaries to a date so close to the convention (within ten weeks or so) that it guarantees disorderliness, then those states should forfeit their delegates and the number needed for a majority should accordingly drop.

As if not perpetuating a nationwide public health emergency is less important than guaranteeing an orderly convention?

That's a false dichotomy.

The states pushing their primaries back (which is acceptable if given at least a two-weeks notice) to just a few weeks to a convention is irresponsible and should be penalized. But the penalty shouldn't come at the expense of the states that already went through their elections under poor conditions -- which is why I reject the notion that it's somehow "perpetuating" it.

[Storebought]

The DNC should put a rule that says that if states postpone their primaries to a date so close to the convention (within ten weeks or so) that it guarantees disorderliness, then those states should forfeit their delegates and the number needed for a majority should accordingly drop.

As if not perpetuating a nationwide public health emergency is less important than guaranteeing an orderly convention?

That's a false dichotomy.

The states pushing their primaries back (which is acceptable if given at least a two-weeks notice) to just a few weeks to a convention is irresponsible and should be penalized. But the penalty shouldn't come at the expense of the states that already went through their elections under poor conditions -- which is why I reject the notion that it's somehow "perpetuating" it.

Those states did perpetuate it. Yes, turnout was lower, but that's on them because they still chose to hold elections when it was already apparent that doing so would further the likelihood that people could get this virus. At least the states that are postponing &/or replacing in-person aspects with vote-by-mail aren't. States making smart decisions shouldn't be penalized because dumb states chose to make dumb decisions.

That's the issue: those states especially in the South that are postponing their primaries aren't replacing them with a vote-by-mail or online voting or even just plain paper ballots that are safer to handle than touch-screen machines. (I don't want to discuss the disease aspects of this because my concern is just to end this primary season quickly -- but there is no indication that warm weather will make the virus go away).

Can the DNC proclaim Biden the presumptive nominee for states to avoid hosting toxic primaries altogether? Can the November election be postponed for the same reason if a stay-at-home order is still in place by then?

[Storebought]

It's not a question of it can't be done as it won't be done -- as the contests in the west coast primarily have been done successfully with absentee or mail-in ballots.

The states postponing elections aren't extending the time period of absentee voting in the meanwhile -- they're simply holding back the date to June or something and holding an ordinary, presumably just as contagious, in-person vote then.

The DNC has little control over how states manage the mechanics of the primary election itself, but this comment

In some states, it is literally impossible without amending the state constitution.

strikes me as dubious.