It took a while, but a frustrated state committee finally set the date for Washington’s presidential primary. February 19 it is.

This is not, in itself, a big deal. The Spokesman-Review got it right in an editorial suggesting that the strongest argument for moving the election date forward was: “Oh, why not?”

This state’s presidential nominating process falls short on two counts: the date and the dynamics.

Consider first the date. Even with the earlier election, Washington is likely to be an afterthought.

February 19 falls two weeks after the February 5 primary elections in more than a dozen states – including populous California, New York, and Illinois – that may well determine each party’s nominee. By that evening, some 30 states will have selected their delegates.

Secretary of State Sam Reed, who wants the state “to play an important role nationally,” acknowledged, “We’re gambling that it’s not going to be over on the 5th.”

It’s not a gamble. It’s a desperate, if coy, plea for attention. Perhaps fearing we’d be overlooked on the 5th, the committee positioned Washington on the edge of the dance floor – somewhere between the cool kids and the wallflowers – close enough to the action to attract some notice, but not so close as to risk immediate rejection.

Regardless of when the election falls, however, the dynamic is wrong. The results don’t matter. And they shouldn’t.

In the years since an initiative to the Legislature established the primary in 1989, Democrats have never used it to determine convention delegates. And they won’t in 2008. Republicans will let the primary determine 51 percent of their delegates, but they’ve been inconsistent, allocating different shares in different elections.

In 2004, the state didn’t conduct the election because the Republicans had President George W. Bush and Democrats, well, just didn’t care.

Not caring is the right call. The caucus system, which both parties use, makes more sense. Our politics have become too intemperate and too impersonal. And I think there’s a clear correlation. It’s easy to employ invective anonymously, through e-mails, blogs, and hot talk. Most of us, though, trim our talons when we’re face-to-face.

We’ve traded community of place for communities of interest, ducking political dialogue with neighbors while seeking reinforcement from strangers. Even the once-unifying experience of lining up at the polls has been replaced by the mail-in ballot.

Critics charge that caucuses exclude too many voters, relative to the higher turnout primary elections. True enough. Voting is easy and state officials focus on turnout numbers like teenagers trying to boost their MySpace friends list. Add music and the American Idol team could really juice vote count.

There’s more to selecting a party’s nominee than the “insta-poll” of today’s presidential primaries. Caucuses attract the most committed and well-informed party members, precisely the folks who should determine the party’s nominee. For those who’ve not participated in them: Don’t be misled. Each political party embraces enough diversity of opinion to create a delightfully raucous caucus.

Selecting a party’s candidate for public office should not be left to the whims of the willfully uncommitted. So it’s appropriate that the presidential primary expressly requires that voters declare their party affiliation and that their declaration is made available to the party. Here, where voters cling to the unconstitutional blanket primary, the taint of party affiliation may be enough to suppress participation.

It may not matter much. Whether caucus or primary, the nominating process continues its steady transformation. Before the first vote is cast next year, the nominees may have already been determined by polls and pocketbooks.

This year, money and early popularity matter more than ever. The front-loaded cycle lessens the influence of Iowa and New Hampshire, small states that allowed the relatively unknown and underfunded candidate a chance at a breakout moment. And, of course, it erodes the importance of mid-size states like Washington that hold their primaries after February 5.

Although our presidential primary may not matter, the state’s politically active voters do. The process belongs to the parties, to Republicans and Democrats. If you want to make a difference, choose a side and back a candidate – with time, money and work. That’s what counts.