Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
6. "A mere snapshot of public opinion..."
Wed Apr 12, 2017, 03:33 PM
Apr 2017

Do we not want that in elections? I know. Opinion at that moment.

There are positives and negatives to everything, but a 2-year campaign also gave people time to "forget" and rationalize away what initially seemed inexcusable. They also encourage people to require campaigns to be entertaining. This gives a tremendous advantage to the most outrageously sensationalist and attention grabbing candidate and makes discussion of issues, policies and procedures losing moves.

As for giant California moving up front, I can understand it. I was a California voter for 40 years who accepted voting after the results were already known, realizing that voting before the rest of the country would be just inexcusably...rude. But let's face it, what happened in November was far more inexcusably rude and inimical to democracy. Fuck 'em.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It's unfair that any state's voters get to vote before any others' really. Note though... PoliticAverse Apr 2017 #1
It's also unfair that my Calif. vote equals 1/3rd of Wyoming voter's... Pluvious Apr 2017 #24
It is a good idea...and would make sure we don't have a useless prolonged Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #2
I'm not convinced he won't resign or be impeached by then. But we must defeat Pence/Ryan/whoever Norbert9 Apr 2017 #10
I'm not convinced Trump wouldn't be primary-ed on the right by Republicans too. TeamPooka Apr 2017 #14
Sequential voting over several months tests the candidates on issues bucolic_frolic Apr 2017 #3
"A mere snapshot of public opinion..." Hortensis Apr 2017 #6
It's about f'ing time.. denbot Apr 2017 #4
Yes! New Hampshire and Iowa have had an outsized place in American politics, LuckyLib Apr 2017 #11
Completely agree. One of the biggest loser's in 2016 , California Democrats stuffmatters Apr 2017 #15
I wish others of us could have earlier primaries BumRushDaShow Apr 2017 #5
Good. yardwork Apr 2017 #7
Good. Wish they were looking to set it the same day as Iowa and NH. nt. NCTraveler Apr 2017 #8
As a New Hampshire Democrat I have to say... teamster633 Apr 2017 #9
Hell yes! TeamPooka Apr 2017 #12
Hooray! BadgerMom Apr 2017 #13
Unintended consequence: Even bigger advantage to better funded candidates. stevenleser Apr 2017 #16
Good Hekate Apr 2017 #17
We finally get to really participate. Sounds great n/t taught_me_patience Apr 2017 #18
I hope they do this - It'll certainly be exciting eleny Apr 2017 #19
K&R. Mike Niendorff Apr 2017 #20
Moving up is one thing. Violating party rules, as in this bill, is very different. Jim Lane Apr 2017 #21
I fully support this. Foamfollower Apr 2017 #22
Good. Then maybe we can avoid having to pick between 3 East Coasters all opposed to legal marijuana Warren DeMontague Apr 2017 #23
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Seeking 2020 clout, Calif...»Reply #6