Ugh. Alaska/Georgia are the latest lemmings. Stop the Insanity Please!!!!!

[Perky]

By JIM HALPIN
Associated Press Writer


ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) -- Georgia and Alaska joined the growing list of states pushing up their presidential primary voting to Feb. 5, a date clearly shaping up as a national primary day for Republicans and Democrats.

In Alaska, caucuses will be held Feb. 5, 2008. In 2004, Alaska Democrats held their caucus in March, while Republicans waited until the end of May to hold their convention.

"We wanted to make sure Alaska had a reasonable standing in the public debate," said Randy Ruedrich, chairman of the Republican Party of Alaska. "We're going to be on Feb. 5, along with what appears to be over half the country."

In Georgia, Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue signed a bill on Tuesday that pushed the state's primaries up by a month, from March 4 to Feb. 5.

Fifteen states, led by delegate-rich New York, California and New Jersey, have moved their primary voting to Feb. 5 and at least five states, including Illinois and Texas, are close to making a similar shift.

The first problem with the bunching is that if someone...whomever...does well in the Iowa/NH tilts. they have momentum going into SC/FL and then 2/5 winds up being a ratifier with no time to do anything except commercials after commercial after commercial. What if we do not make the best choice in the first round and we have no way to un ring the bell after 2/5?

The second problem us that the bunching means that everyone is still going to be on the ballot in each state on 2/5 there is little reason to pull off the ballot until after 2/5 because you want to have delegates should 2/5 not produce an inevitable candidate.

The Third and biggest problem is that should IA/NH, NV and SC/FL not produce a clear leader/presumptive nominee then it means 2/5 may in fact wind up being a push where the top three are still fully in the race. the problem is that the last 20 contests are not enough to push anyone over the top in terms of delegate count and that means a brokered convention.

Of course the flip side of this is that the Republicans are in similar straits and perhaps they are even worse off given the geopolitics. A brokered convention for them seems almost inevitable.


Small consolation.

Are we going to have the first five contest followed by a week of nationally televised debates which would mean no one could get out in the hustings and do actual handshakes and schmoozing? Does it mean ultimately that those with the money to will rely solely on Super Bowl ads (look at the timing) and that is how we will choose a nominee?

I have no real tension with a national primary for 25 states, I just wish it was about a month later then right on top of the "early five" because there is no time to reassess the remaining pool and no reason for any of the second tier to bow out gracefully. No time for Debates, or rallies or much of anything that is local in nature.

How does this all shake out?

[Perky]

1. kick

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:

[n2doc]

2. Can't have anyone really have time to think, now can we?

The only real solution for this is to have a rotating series of states go "early" Have Iowa, New Hampshire (to keep both historical perspective and a small enough starting ground so that pols have to talk to real people for at least a little while), then a group of 3 states that is rotated from the pool every 4 years. Then 3 more, etc. etc...Everybody gets a bite of the attention and $$$. As it stands we are going to end up with the MSM/Big Biz/Punditocracy making all of our choices for us. Goodbye any shred of democracy....

[Perky]

3. I agree

A national primary is a mistake. because if you have a seven person field no one will get a majority and that means a brokered convention where super delegate will control the result.

[n2doc]

5. Or the person with the most early $$$ will buy name recognition and win

And no-one will get the time to learn about their previous postions, how they hold up under debate, etc., etc.

The ultimate "big money wins all" format.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Another good reason for a national primary.

Not to mention cutting down on the influence of the money guys and the phony coffee shop photo ops where the celebrities get to dress up like "ordinary" folks and talk the purist bullshit.

“Now, the man on the stand he wants my vote,
He's a-runnin' for office on the ballot note.
He's out there preachin' in front of the steeple,
Tellin' me he loves all kinds-a people.
(He's eatin' bagels
He's eatin' pizza
He's eatin' chitlins
He's eatin' bullshit!)”

Bob Dylan

[Perky]

6. and if no one emerges from the crowded field with a majority ?

what then? a second or third ballot at the national convention?

Super-delgates holding all the power on the first ballot?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Maybe. But, my main concern is getting the money out of the process.

The other concern is the power wielded, up to now, by the small states. More "liberal" candidates have to either pander to the "moderates" and conservatives, or risk losing a primary and credibility. The media being primed to announce that X candidate "lost" in Iowa or New Hampshire and is therefore no longer tenable.

And, the undemocratic nature of the whole primary system in which states decide who will be the candidates for an office that represents the country as a whole.

[Perky]

9. have you ever checked the list ouf super delgates?

mostly seriusly monied power-brokers.


I think a national primary plays into the hads of elitists.


I have problems with Iow and NH going first... but what would make more sense? add Ohio, Norht Carolina, Oregon and New Jesrsy to a first round?

[Jersey Devil]

7. NJ is tired of having nothing to say about the nominee

NJ is one of the bluest states on the list yet we usually have nothing to say because our primary is in June, long after the race is over. I have nothing against Iowa and NH, but please explain to me why those sparsely populated states have so much to say about the nominee rather than states like NJ, NY, etc.