drdon326
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-04 09:41 PM
Original message |
Opinion;s needed..Would changing the nominating process help the DNC ?? |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-04 09:51 PM by drdon326
INSTEAD of iowa and NH how about regionalize the process into 5 regionsal nominating elections...north,south, midwest , mountain/southwest and pacific.
And most importantly ...start the process in the area/region where dems are weakest....can you say south?
|
Dehumanizer
(174 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-04 09:43 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I'm not a professional in the primaries area.. |
|
but that sounds like a great idea. Personally, I think it's bullshit that really, three or four states singlehandedly DECIDE who the candidate is. Shouldn't it be a national effort to decide our nominee?
|
drdon326
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-04 09:52 PM
Response to Original message |
2. kick..no one wants to comment.?? |
Bluebear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-04 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Sure. I don't think Kerry was the problem. |
|
The media obviously had it in for Dr. Dean the frontrunner. I am not saying he would have won or lost, but the popular choice died the "Dean scream" death. And when we had our nominee, the GOP sent out flyers saying Kerry would ban the Bible. They will do anything to win an election, then say WE will say anything to win an eleciton.
|
drdon326
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-04 09:58 PM
Response to Original message |
4. last kick before this drops into oblivion. |
TSIAS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-04 10:00 PM
Response to Original message |
5. It wouldn't be a bad idea |
|
I don't like the idea of the nomination being won essentially in two states. Give the South and West a voice in the process.
The problem is that IA and NH really cling to their premeire status. It will be hard to make them give it up.
|
LiberalAndProud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-04-04 11:07 AM
Response to Original message |
6. As a lifelong Dem in Nebraska |
|
Something has to change in the primary process. There is no firing of the Dem base here. This state goes red by default.
Our primary election is held mid-May. The candidate has already been selected. How can we expect to change the color of a state when it is conceded before the primaries? I do understand that we hold less than 1% of the EV, but we had almost blue states on each side of us (Iowa and Colorado). Was our vote really less flexible than our neighbors to the east and west?
Our Democratic Congressional candidate ran an ad that said, "I vote with my Republican colleagues 90% of the time." That is the LAMEST platform I can conceive. Vote for me, I get it right 90% of the time?
Until the Dems make a concerted effort to win hearts and minds in mid-America, we can expect this outcome to be repeated again in 2008, and again in 2012 and again in 2016. Any questions?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:17 PM
Response to Original message |