Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYTimes: End the first in nation primaries in IA and NH...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 08:40 AM
Original message
NYTimes: End the first in nation primaries in IA and NH...
The candidates have spent a year and tens of millions of dollars in Iowa, and Thursday night the first actual voters offered their first assessments. Some candidates and their strategists were hoping the caucuses and the New Hampshire primary next week would settle the race, weeding out the contenders for the two major parties’ presidential nominations. Watching the campaign in cold, snowy and mostly empty Iowa, we were hoping for something else — that this year’s Iowa-New Hampshire rush to judgment will be the last.

For all of Thursday night’s drama, the results in Iowa did not preclude a race going into New Hampshire, and, we hope, beyond — to South Carolina, Florida and the cluster of primaries on Feb. 5. Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton, but she’s got plenty of money left, and John Edwards got a boost. Mike Huckabee’s win was unlikely to deter Mitt Romney or the Republicans who did not contest Iowa: John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani.

Keeping this race alive so significant numbers of Americans in more populated states can participate would begin to make up for the ludicrous spectacle of the past year, which enriched the television networks and the political consultants (some $300 million already spent) far more than it enriched the political dialogue. We hope both parties will wake up and end the undemocratic system in which the choice of a new president rests far too heavily on nonbinding votes in January by voters that don’t necessarily represent the rest of the country.

We don’t question the enthusiasm or the commitment of the people of Iowa and New Hampshire. But Iowa, where a huge turnout amounts to less than 10 percent of the population, is about 92 percent white, more rural and older than the rest of the nation. New Hampshire has a non-Hispanic white population of about 95 percent. Iowa’s Democrats are more liberal and more protectionist than the nation’s Democrats. Its Republicans are more conservative, and religiously driven, than the nation’s Republicans. And yet, The Boston Globe reported that Mr. Romney spent $7 million on ads in Iowa. That’s nearly $4 per registered voter.

..snip

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/opinion/04fri1.html?ref=opinion

It just is not representative and is shuttin out many good candidates this year (Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, et al)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RL3AO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
1. Heres what should happen.
Week 1
Tuesday: Iowa Caucus
Thursday or Saturday: New Hampshire Primary

Week 2
Tuesday: Half of remaining primaries/caucuses
Thursday: Remaining primaries/caucuses

That lessens the importance of Iowa, but lets them remain first. It also makes every state important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Spread It Out More
In other words, don't pick four states to go first and say, "Okay, all you rest can go anytime after FEb 5."

All the first four states (picked on rotating basis for a diverse political and ethnic mix) on the same day in mid to late January. You could also pick the first four based on voter turn out in last election. Reward activism.

spread out the rest from February to April.

The people of Iowa and New Hampshire contend that since they get to "look a candidate in the eye" a qualified person without much money can really have a shot. That sounds nice, but does it really work like that when the primaries are so compact like they are? But, if they are spread out, candidadtes will really have to campaign in more states. Furthermore, they will have more time to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. I'm in New Hampshire and *I* have agreed with this PoV for decades!
It's ludicrous to allow Republican-leaning places to pick
the standard-bearer for the Democratic party and it plays
directly into the hands of our enemies.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
4. I'm inclined to agree
I've never liked this system. Maybe it's because as a New Yorker my primary vote has been all but pointless in the last few contests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
9119495 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
5. I live in Iowa...here is my plan
The states that were closest between Democrats and republicans in the previous cycle go first. These keeps both Iowa and New Hampshire in the front for now and doesn't rock the boat too much. It also diminishes the importance of any state without two competetive parties. If a state wants to have an impact, both parties would have to work their butts off to make it happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 09:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC