I hope those two states enjoy their 15 minutes of fame. Seriously, how many times in the past have we seen the Iowa and/or New Hampshire results become practically meaningless, the day after, ‘Super Tuesday’?
By your logic we can also have these states use the same argument: RI, VT, UT, WY, DE and several others. So why does New Hampshire forbid these states to schedule a primary or caucus prior to theirs ?
“What a curious society we have. Just about everyone, left, right and center, will agree that we have little say in who the presidential nominees are and decry the lack of choices. Apparently, absolutely nothing is being done about it.”In my state only a legislator can submit a proposal and it then needs 75% approval to appear on the ballot … not much chance of change. The political parties have firmly wedged themselves between the people and ethical governing as they mysteriously become wealthy in office.
“The people of NH can actually meet and listen to the individual candidates…”Iowa & New Hampshire are two of the oldest, whitest states. Iowa’s caucus goers tend to be at the far left or far right of their parties. They are not at all representative of most of they electorate.As we’ve seen, anyone who actually slips through the security apparatus surrounding a major candidate gets shouted down by the crowd. The candidates aren’t having a single moment that isn’t scripted. Anyone who actually cares can get a pretty good idea of what the candidates will do by looking at their platforms. Giving those two states so much attention is just stupidity on the part of both major partiesThe supposed advantage of having small states vote first, is that candidates who don’t have huge amounts of money have a shot at getting attention. It’s clearly not working that way. It would make sense to have five election dates, with 10 diverse states voting on each date over a period of a couple months.
Why should anything be done? After all, the rich control the politicians and they would not want change so, the ones who make the rules control it and the rest of us have no power at all.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member over 8 years ago
There should be a law requiring all primaries to be held in the first week of February or better yet August.
Simon_Jester over 8 years ago
I hope those two states enjoy their 15 minutes of fame. Seriously, how many times in the past have we seen the Iowa and/or New Hampshire results become practically meaningless, the day after, ‘Super Tuesday’?
cjr53 over 8 years ago
I think I’d vote for Bernie for president and Hillary for VP. I think that would be the best option for the largest numbers of Americans.
WestNYC Premium Member over 8 years ago
By your logic we can also have these states use the same argument: RI, VT, UT, WY, DE and several others. So why does New Hampshire forbid these states to schedule a primary or caucus prior to theirs ?
superposition over 8 years ago
“What a curious society we have. Just about everyone, left, right and center, will agree that we have little say in who the presidential nominees are and decry the lack of choices. Apparently, absolutely nothing is being done about it.”In my state only a legislator can submit a proposal and it then needs 75% approval to appear on the ballot … not much chance of change. The political parties have firmly wedged themselves between the people and ethical governing as they mysteriously become wealthy in office.
Uncle Joe Premium Member over 8 years ago
“The people of NH can actually meet and listen to the individual candidates…”Iowa & New Hampshire are two of the oldest, whitest states. Iowa’s caucus goers tend to be at the far left or far right of their parties. They are not at all representative of most of they electorate.As we’ve seen, anyone who actually slips through the security apparatus surrounding a major candidate gets shouted down by the crowd. The candidates aren’t having a single moment that isn’t scripted. Anyone who actually cares can get a pretty good idea of what the candidates will do by looking at their platforms. Giving those two states so much attention is just stupidity on the part of both major partiesThe supposed advantage of having small states vote first, is that candidates who don’t have huge amounts of money have a shot at getting attention. It’s clearly not working that way. It would make sense to have five election dates, with 10 diverse states voting on each date over a period of a couple months.
Dtroutma over 8 years ago
The thought of Trump closer than New York, or Cruz closer than Havana, to the White House, should give everyone nightmares.
Lyman Elliott Premium Member over 8 years ago
Great idea!! I second the motion.
Lyman Elliott Premium Member over 8 years ago
Why should anything be done? After all, the rich control the politicians and they would not want change so, the ones who make the rules control it and the rest of us have no power at all.
DrDon1 over 8 years ago
Just remember who won the last two GOP Iowa caucuses …Santorum and Huckabee. Sure meant a lot!
zekedog55 over 8 years ago
That duo could get a lot accomplished. Should Bernie get the nomination, I hope he at least floats the possibility to Hillary…
Dtroutma over 8 years ago
Hmm, first off the launch pad; remember the vanguard failures preceded the Jupiter launch of a reliable vehicle.