What's so special about Iowa, NH, and even Nevada?

[Bake]

Why do they get to be the first primaries/caucuses anyway? What's the point of our nominating process being decided by (the first) two small, mostly-white states? Can we wait to decide until we get to some "real" states like, e.g., California? New York? Illinois? Ohio?

Bake

[2rth2pwr]

1. delete.. forget it.

[bunnies]

5. Thought better of that remark eh?

Id say thats a good decision.

[2rth2pwr]

21. Sometimes I can control myself. nt

[bunnies]

23. lol. I know the feeling. :toast: nt.

[Kolesar]

2. Supposedly, any candidate get traction even with a small budget in a small state

"supposedly"

In Ohio, candidates have to run TV or print ads in six media markets.

[DontTreadOnMe]

3. Didn't you know?

Folks from Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada are more sensible than people in California and New York. You don't want a bunch of sinners picking the President, do ya?

[BOSSHOG]

4. Hey Bake, we are first

in obesity, diabetes and unwed childbirths but never primaries.

I agree. I think its incredibly arrogant of Iowans and New Hampshirites to insist they be first. Let the locusts swarm Mississippi every 30 years or so. Rotate the primaries or have four regional primaries which also rotate.

[redqueen]

6. I like your idea...

:thumbsup:

[dajoki]

7. That makes too much sense...

that's why it will never happen.

[Bake]

14. Regional primaries! Excellent idea!

I know that in states where I have lived (TN, KY, MS), everything was over and done, the fat lady had sung, by the time they got around to asking who I wanted. Somehow that never seemed fair to me.

Bake

[bunnies]

8. Yayyy.

I love threads wherein people will chat about what assholes residents of my state are. :eyes:

[youthere]

10. Me too. It absolutely makes my day.

[BOSSHOG]

13. Why should New Hampshire always be first?

Lets rotate the primaries and let other assholes have a disproportionate say in who gets nominated.

[bunnies]

16. Im all for rotating primaries...

and letting other assholes have their say. :rofl: And I dont personally know anyone that would be disagreeable to that. Its the state not wanting to lose the revenue brought in by the primaries that would make it hard to change.

My issue with threads like this is that they usually degenerate into people claiming that NH voters are (insert insult here). The voters here dont chose the primary date. Bill Gardner does.

[BOSSHOG]

18. I live in Mississippi

I'm familiar with how threads about one's state degenerates. However, in the case of MS most of it is true.

[bunnies]

20. .....

:spray: I feel your pain my friend. :toast:

[Bake]

15. I never said anything about Iowans or NHers or Nevadans

I just asked why they get to be first. Seems like a fair question to me.

Bake

[BOSSHOG]

17. I'm the asshole (one of them I guess) who was not nice Bake

The poster has a valid point and so do we.

[bunnies]

19. No you didnt.

But thats what these thread usually turn into.

[goldcanyonaz]

9. Michigan should have been the first state, their economy is FUCKED

[knitter4democracy]

12. I don't know about that. Our economy is in the toilet, though.

First was ridiculous. Today's date is just fine, but my vote didn't count. No one fought for my vote, that's for sure.

[sandnsea]

11. Let's let money rule

Brilliant idea.

Smaller states go first so candidates have to get face to face with people.

[fujiyama]

22. Money rules as it is

We should at least have rotating regional primaries. NH and IA don't have sacred rights to give or take momentum from candidates.

The primary system we have is completely idiotic. It's incredibly undemocratic. Caucuses are even more exclusionary. Why not just have smoke filled rooms? The whole thing is a charade as it is.

[sandnsea]

24. How would rotating regions help?

Let the south go first? The northeast?

The problem is when they crammed all the primaries onto Super Tuesday which made Iowa and New Hampshire the only place to overcome the monied interest. All we have to do is spread out the 22 states voting Feb 5 and it turns into a normal primary again.

I think moving Nevada and SC up has broadened the diversity quite a bit. After Feb 5, we'll have had 26 states vote. Any time 26 states vote, including CA, NY, MA; then that's going to be a pretty decisive statement on who the candidate is going to be.