When did we switch from party conventions picking candidates to primaries?? And why??

Question

My recollection is that Eisenhower and Stevenson were convention picks, of course Truman and FDR were convention picks. It seems like the primary process has been reduced to sound bites and media pundits running the show. How about going to Party Conventions. Maybe they can find another Lincoln rather than the bush league Bush and or the classless Clintons.

Answer 1

The candidates are still picked by party conventions. What has changed is the role of state primaries in picking the delegates to the national conventions.

Essentially, the major date for this change was 1968. After the Chicago Convention in which there were disputes about the proper delegation from certain states and other complaints about how party bosses controlled the delegate selection process, a committee (chaired by George McGovern) was appointed to suggest rules changes to the Democratic National Committee to make the process more open and democratic.

Basically, for each of the next several conventions (1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, and 1988), the Democrats had committees meeting between the conventions to tweak the rules. However, the main rules changes were done for the 1972 Convention and the Republican Party essentially followed suit with those rules.

With the national parties having changed the rules about delegate selection to encourage binding primaries, it should not be too surprising that the party members in the various states demanded binding primaries. It should also not be too surprising that the candidates picked up on the rule change and discovered as a result of the 1976 campaign that participation in all of the primaries was no longer optional but instead the only way to get the nomination.

The impetus behind this move was the same as the impetus 100 years ago for primary elections in general. Namely that the selection of the candidates of a party should not be the result of backroom deals but rather the public choice of the members of the party (or the members of the public). Once the genie of democracy is let out of the bottle, it is hard to put it back in.

Answer 2

Actually, the candidates are still chosen by the parties' National Conventions. Only 2 (that I know of) use primaries as part of the selection process: Democrats & Republicans. It is up to the parties' officers whether or not to use a particular state's primary.

Case in point: When the Florida Legislature voted to change their primary to late January, in violation of regulations set forth by the Democratic Party, the national party headquarters decided not to use Florida's primary in the nomination process. Even though many of us see it as stupid politics on the party's part, what they did is completely legal.

Expect to see major changes in the primary /nomination process between the 2008 & 2012 elections.

Answer 3

Basically in 1976 it began to change to the primary system being dominant from the old system of party bosses and conventions. This was because there were more state primaries and caucuses and winning these states gave candidates momentum to win their party's nomination. This helped Jimmy Carter win the Democratic nomination in 1976, because he was basically an unknown nationally, but he campaigned in more primaries than the other candidates, who underestimated their importance, and eventually gained enough momentum through this process to get national attention, get the nomination and be elected President. Theoretically, this gave lesser known candidates a chance to compete with better known candidates.

Answer 4

The conventions were smoke filled rooms, dominated by
party bosses while primaries allow voters to make an impact.
In the 60s and 70s, primaries slowly supplanted conventions
as the best method of choosing presidential candidates.

Answer 5

I miss the days of having at least the running mate decided and the convention. They start way to earlie so that you end up being sick of who ever is running by election time.