States are dropping primaries

[muon2]

The states control their primary dates, and the form. The national parties provide a sanction for the primaries and caucuses. Note how DC set a January primary date this year but was awarded no delegates with that vote.

Personally, I think these are party candidates, so the parties really should control the process. As Washington state did this year, the cost can be put on the parties by letting them hold caucuses. I think if more states did this, the candidates would be more reflective of the party, and a platform created by the party.

[muon2]

Note how DC set a January primary date this year but was awarded no delegates with that vote.

DC has caucuses coming up, which does award delegates.

But DC wanted to go early to highlight  their lack of representation. The DNC wouldn't sanction the event and some candidates didn't choose to be listed on that ballot. They still get their delegates at the later date.

[muon2]

And the problem with that is...?

There would be no money for the primaries.

IL is considered a primary state, but at the township level it is optional. The state sets a date and each party in each township can either run a primary or hold a caucus. The purpose is to nominate a slate of township officers. Parties hold caucuses because its a lot cheaper.

In my township, every four years each party holds its caucus. The township GOP rents the local VFW for one evening and volunteers from the precinct committeemen check the registration lists according to state law. There's always a lawyer and parlimentarian kept around in case of questions. All in all it's smooth and inexpensive.