senatorlamb
10/23/07, 09:40 PM
With all the controversy surrounding states like Florida and Michigan moving up their primaries, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on the primary process. Do Iowa and New Hampshire deserve to be first? Or is their prominence really about special interests and tradition run amok?
Some would argue that the relative small size of these states allow for more formal, retail politics in which a candidate has to truly speak to the people, sometimes multiple times to get their votes. It also allows for an insurgent or surprise candidate like Jimmy Carter to catapult over the establishment favorites since money and advertising means less than it would say, in the high priced media markets of New York or California.
Others would say that the demographics in Iowa and New Hampshire do not adequately represent the electorate, especially in terms of minority representation. Bluntly put, why are these states so deserving of the privlege? Shouldn't we all have a say? I remember by the time the New Jersey primary came around in 2004, Kerry was a shoe in.
So I ask, should the prominence of Iowa and N. Hampshire be scratched? If so, what should be put in it's place? Rotating regional primaries? A national primary day? How would this affect both the lesser known candidates, as well as the well-funded, frontrunners?
Go.
Some would argue that the relative small size of these states allow for more formal, retail politics in which a candidate has to truly speak to the people, sometimes multiple times to get their votes. It also allows for an insurgent or surprise candidate like Jimmy Carter to catapult over the establishment favorites since money and advertising means less than it would say, in the high priced media markets of New York or California.
Others would say that the demographics in Iowa and New Hampshire do not adequately represent the electorate, especially in terms of minority representation. Bluntly put, why are these states so deserving of the privlege? Shouldn't we all have a say? I remember by the time the New Jersey primary came around in 2004, Kerry was a shoe in.
So I ask, should the prominence of Iowa and N. Hampshire be scratched? If so, what should be put in it's place? Rotating regional primaries? A national primary day? How would this affect both the lesser known candidates, as well as the well-funded, frontrunners?
Go.