UConn James Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Arnold has now set California's presidential primary to Feb. 5 up from June. New Hampshire moved theirs up earlier this year.... There's a good article here. I just don't like the acceleration of the presidential campaigning. It's getting crazier as every state wants to be the first to have a primary so pols will actually pay attention to them. The two candidates will be selected in early Feb, and then have 9 months to spew sweet nothings and fling escalating attack ads. Meanwhile, the candidates running for the nominations have less time to debate so people can actually have enough to base a decision on. It is good news only for early front-runners (who have a tendency to burn out once people learn about their ideas) and bad news for a lesser-known candidate who might have great ideas that no one ever hears b/c there's so little time for exposure. It is dangerous for democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Arnold has now set California's presidential primary to Feb. 5 up from June. New Hampshire moved theirs up earlier this year.... There's a good article here. I just don't like the acceleration of the presidential campaigning. It's getting crazier as every state wants to be the first to have a primary so pols will actually pay attention to them. The two candidates will be selected in early Feb, and then have 9 months to spew sweet nothings and fling escalating attack ads. Meanwhile, the candidates running for the nominations have less time to debate so people can actually have enough to base a decision on. It is bad and dangerous for democracy. What's the difference between them spewing sweet nothing at each other in the primaries and doing it in the general election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 What's the difference between them spewing sweet nothing at each other in the primaries and doing it in the general election? The primaries and the general election?? What's that crap coming out of their mouths now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 The primaries and the general election?? What's that crap coming out of their mouths now? They need more Poll's in Kalifornia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 They need more Poll's in Kalifornia. What are you Irish or something? The gas lamp district in San Diego is full of Polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 What are you Irish or something? The gas lamp district in San Diego is full of Polls. So what you're saying is... That the Irish people in San Diego are Poll sitters? Isn't that illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Arnold has now set California's presidential primary to Feb. 5 up from June. New Hampshire moved theirs up earlier this year.... There's a good article here. I just don't like the acceleration of the presidential campaigning. It's getting crazier as every state wants to be the first to have a primary so pols will actually pay attention to them. The two candidates will be selected in early Feb, and then have 9 months to spew sweet nothings and fling escalating attack ads. Meanwhile, the candidates running for the nominations have less time to debate so people can actually have enough to base a decision on. It is good news only for early front-runners (who have a tendency to burn out once people learn about their ideas) and bad news for a lesser-known candidate who might have great ideas that no one ever hears b/c there's so little time for exposure. It is dangerous for democracy. I totally agree. Its a really a bad idea Moving the primaries up is just going to replace caucuses, straw polls, and debates with media exposure, name recognition, and corporate $ponsorship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Texas is considering moving theirs up as well according to the local news. Elections should be all the SAME god damned day, with the SAME god damned resources. I don't necessarily advocate mandatory media time, but an EVEN playing field is what is needed. Of course, the politicians who exploit the system are the ones in office, which means it will never get changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Elections should be all the SAME god damned day, with the SAME god damned resources. I don't necessarily advocate mandatory media time, but an EVEN playing field is what is needed. Unfortunately the candidates don't all have the same re$ources nor do they all get the same media coverage By front loading the primary system the lesser candidates like Biden, Huckabee, and the Lawn Gnome don't really get a chance to get their message out to the voters. I suspect it will also have the side effect of limiting the candidate's choice of Vice Presidential nominees to whoever finished second in the big primary American Idol is a better model of democracy than Super-Duper Tuesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts