The drumbeat to end the race is why states trip over each other to get early primaries

[dsc]

First, let me say that if Hillary Clinton loses one of or both of Texas and Ohio she will drop out or at least suspend her campaign. But we have had weeks now of "why isn't Hillary dropping out?". This was without 4 of the largest 11 states voting (Ohio, Texas, NC, and PA). This is why we have the unseemly trying to jump in line that MI and FL engaged in this year (and the resulting mess). If Hillary loses, she loses. But all this she should drop out crap isn't just insulting to her, it is insulting to those of us who live in late voting states. If the race is still on, why shouldn't I get the very same say all of you got?

[LWolf]

1. The bigger question:

Why should Democrats expect to get the votes in the GE of those they didn't value in the primary?

Why go with a calendar that disenfranchises the majority of Democratic Party voters by narrowing the field after only a few states, and then annoints a candidate before the primaries are done? Why not organize a primary season to give every Democrat an equal vote? You know...to do it democratically.

Or, if the Democratic Party doesn't feel the need to be democratic, why expect those disenfranchised to unify behind a candidate they didn't have any part of nominating?

[havocmom]

3. I am planning to piss in the wind when my state holds its primary IN JUNE

Still voting Edwards. Know it is pointless, but my state has few people and a very late primary, so I don't matter anyway.

Last time, it was Dean.

Sad thing is , I know for a FACT that a lot of my GOP neighbors would have voted for both of those worthy candidates in general elections. Both would have been able to get voters who understand they are disenfranchised by the narrowness of the choices.

So, I dutifully go to the polls, after the nominee has been selected, and vote my conscious and heart. In November, I support the nominee, but usually grudgingly of late.

[LWolf]

10. I'll be right before you, on May 20th.

I may vote for Gravel, if he's on the ballot, or I may write in Kucinich.

Pissing into the wind, indeed. :grr:

[NC_Nurse]

2. I understand your feelings about leaving us out.

OTOH, if the Hillary campaign was going so negative then I doubt people would be so eager for her to go.
She is alternately gracious and vicious. I don't think it's helping her, but it may weaken us in the GE. If she could stick
with gracious and patiently try to push her message, like DK or pretty much all of the other candidates who have left,
it would be a whole different atmosphere in this primary.

[dsc]

8. sorry but this refrain is always heard, every single year

no matter who is winning and who is losing and the type of campaign.

[JimGinPA]

4. I Live In Pennsylvania, And We Never Have A Say In the Nomination...

I'd happily forgo having the privilege this election. I want Obama to be able to start running against this coming Wednesday.

[hfojvt]

5. on the one hand

it's too bad that every remaining primary is not on March 4th. On the other hand, stretching it out does give some individual attention to each state, but nothing like what Iowa and New Hampshire get. In Kansas, we were happy to be kinda early this year - on Fat Tuesday. But look at how it worked. Biden and Dodd dropped out after Iowa. Richardson dropped out after New Hampshire and Edwards dropped out after South Carolina. Even by Fat Tuesday there were only two choices remaining, which didn't seem like much of a choice to me.

[AndyTiedye]

6. Because Iowa, New Hampshire, & South Carolina Voters Have a God-Given Right to Choose Our Presidents

The rest of us should just accept whomever the voters of those privileged states choose. :sarcasm:

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

7. There are good reasons to spread the primary out

rather than having every state on the same day. However, they should be spread out over a couple of months at most, and not over 5 months. There are 50 states, we could reasonably do 6 per week. The order should be rotated, too, to give every state a say from time to time.

[VotesForWomen]

13. why not have the GE spread out? it's a joke, fer christ's sake. all it does is create a bandwagon ef

effect and leave half the states out of the voting. if the primary was on one day, candidates would do all their campaigning with sufficient time for voters to make an informed decision, just like presumably they do for the GE.

[havocmom]

14. Spread-out primaries ARE imparative as we get more time to observe candidates

and more time to try and force them to really explain their stands on issues. People need time to explore and learn more about those running. It's good to watch how they respond under pressure too.

But it IS annoying that the same states end up pretty much deciding the nominee. I LOVE your idea of rotating the order of the primaries! Absolutely brilliant and elegant in its simplicity! Great solution to same ol same ol. We DO need change and changing the order of primaries would go a long way toward changing how the whole system is rigged!

:applause: :yourock:

[monmouth]

9. I would have loved to have voted for Joe Biden, but that was not to be..n/t

[tgnyc]

11. You're right on the money.

[VotesForWomen]

12. one day national primary. nt

[PassingFair]

15. I am not asking her to drop out!

Let the people decide.

That's what primaries are FOR.

I am GLAD that we are having an extended
primary where all Americans are heard.

Not like the FRONT-LOADED travesty the
Clinton campaign attempted to blow by
the American people!

Viva the DNC!