How should parties pick their candidates?
The question is inspired by this thread, in which some users opined that the Democratic Party should have more control over who becomes a candidate.
There is something to be said for this approach; not only would it have prevented our current predicament in Texas 35, but a more powerful Republican Party would likely have prevented the Trump presidency.
On the other hand, our current primary system was developed — at least in part — as a reaction to the undemocratic nature of decisions made by party elites. And it’s certainly possible to argue that the voters themselves have a better grasp on what the electorate wants than party leadership does. Platner, for instance, is likely a better candidate for Maine than Mills, who is probably who the party would have picked.
What say you? Should we return to the smoke-filled room (or some other less pejorative metaphor)? If so, what would that look like?