What were the main arguments made by progressives in support of holding primaries before general elections?

The main arguments made by progressives in support of holding primaries before general elections are centered around increasing transparency, voter participation, and reducing the influence of political machines.

1. Transparency: One of the key arguments in favor of holding primaries is to enhance transparency in the electoral process. Primaries allow political parties and their candidates to compete openly for the nomination, providing voters with a clear understanding of the candidates' positions and policy platforms. By conducting primaries, the selection of party candidates is no longer an exclusive decision made behind closed doors by party leaders, but rather a more open and democratic process involving the broader electorate.

2. Voter Participation: Another significant argument for holding primaries is to encourage greater voter participation. By allowing individuals to have a say in the selection of party candidates, primaries empower voters and give them a more direct role in shaping the political landscape. This can lead to higher voter turnout and engagement, as citizens feel their voices are heard and have a stake in the outcome.

3. Reducing the Influence of Political Machines: Progressives argue that holding primaries before general elections helps diminish the influence of political machines. Political machines, in the past, exerted significant control over the nomination and election process. By opening up the candidate selection to the larger electorate through primaries, the power of machine politics can be curtailed. This strengthens democracy by reducing the ability of small groups to dominate the political landscape and fosters a more level playing field for candidates.

To summarize, progressives support holding primaries before general elections to increase transparency, promote voter participation, and reduce the influence of political machines. By adopting this approach, they believe that the electoral process becomes more inclusive, democratic, and responsive to the will of the people.

The main arguments made by progressives in support of holding primaries before general elections are as follows:

1. Increased democracy: Proponents argue that primary elections allow for a more inclusive and participatory democratic process. By allowing party members to choose their preferred candidate, primaries provide a greater opportunity for citizens to express their political preferences. This leads to a more representative selection of candidates who better align with the interests of the electorate.

2. Party rejuvenation: Primary elections can help revitalize political parties by engaging grassroots activists and encouraging greater party involvement. By allowing party members to have a direct say in candidate selection, primaries can energize party members and attract new supporters. This contributes to a stronger and more dynamic party system.

3. Candidate accountability: Holding primaries before general elections provides an opportunity for voters to assess candidates' policy positions, character, leadership qualities, and ability to connect with voters. It allows candidates to prove themselves both within their own party and to the broader electorate, ensuring that those who emerge as nominees are more likely to be qualified and responsive to the desires of the voters.

4. Increased transparency: Primaries can enhance the transparency of the candidate selection process. They provide a platform for open debate, allowing candidates to directly communicate their ideas and engage in discussions regarding crucial issues. This transparency fosters a more informed electorate and helps hold candidates accountable for their promises and positions.

5. Reduction of undue influence: Critics argue that the traditional method of candidate selection, such as party bosses or closed-door deals, can result in undemocratic outcomes where party insiders have disproportionate influence. Primaries allow for a merit-based selection process, curbing the influence of political elites and ensuring that candidates are chosen based on their appeal to the wider voting public.

It is important to note that these arguments may vary depending on the specific context and characteristics of the political system in question.