That's why I can never get on board with the idea of a nation-wide primary. It would severely hamper non-traditional candidates who wouldn't have the resources or money to compete in a 50-state primary.
Think of it this way: If there had been a nation-wide primary in '08, Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton probably would've won their respective nominations. That's not a knock on Clinton, it's just the reality - even Obama back in '08 couldn't have competed with her at that level.
What a spaced out primary does is provide lesser known candidates a chance to gain some traction - candidates who don't have the funding to run in 50 states.
More importantly, though, I think it shores up potential problems. I think, believe it or not, Obama benefited from the prolonged primary in '08. Had he or Clinton wrapped that up and we moved on to the general election, the vetting process, being able to change course when things went south and reaffirming the campaign's strategy, who knows what would've happened.
Maybe the Rev. Wright tapes are released in October instead of early spring. By the time November rolled around, everyone had seen the Wright tapes and became indifferent to 'em.
So, I think, in that capacity, it also helps weed out the lesser candidates.
But I do think the primary season is too long. I don't think it should stretch into June/July. They should wrap it up by March or April.
= new reply since forum marked as read
