ltdiver 3 #1 September 1, 2007 Did a search and didn't find a recent thread that discussed just this topic. I'm kind of surprised. In the past few months our eastern states have been attempting the 'one-up-man-ship-' tactic in trying to become the very first state to hold primary elections. As a west coast resident, it just seems silly that a state with a more numerous population isn't the trend setter. Say, like California! We have a diverse population here that should be heard first, not last! It seems that whichever state holds the first vote sets the trend for all of the U.S.'s thought process in the following days. Why is that? Are the candidates that easily discouraged (or encouraged)? Or are we just a bunch of lemmings? Now the first primary elections are in January '08! What happened to March? Why are so many (east coast) states trying to overstep each other? Bring it west, for pete's sake! http://blog.nj.com/njv_peter_mcdonough/2007/08/shuffling_the_primary_deck.html ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #2 September 1, 2007 Oh good grief! http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070830/cm_thenation/45228121 " New Hampshire officials have indicated a willingness to leap over the New Year's line and schedule a primary December, 2007." Stop the madness!! ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #3 September 1, 2007 So, you're wanting the first lemming over the cliff to be California and not New Jersey...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #4 September 1, 2007 Quote So, you're wanting the first lemming over the cliff to be California and not New Jersey... Lemmings follow a leader. CA would be the leader if they were first. Right? ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #5 September 1, 2007 Quote Quote So, you're wanting the first lemming over the cliff to be California and not New Jersey... Lemmings follow a leader. CA would be the leader if they were first. Right? ltdiver The leader is still a lemming, however... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #6 September 1, 2007 With all the early campaigning, debates, and primaries, doesn't it seem as though the country just can't wait for the current administration to be over with? Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #7 September 1, 2007 QuoteWith all the early campaigning, debates, and primaries, doesn't it seem as though the country just can't wait for the current administration to be over with? Probably exactly the view they WANT people to take.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #8 September 2, 2007 There's probably some valid reason they don't do this that I'm not thinking of, but let's just have all the primaries on the same day. There goes the lemming effect. Granted, no candidate will ever bother to visit Iowa again ..."There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #9 September 2, 2007 QuoteThere's probably some valid reason they don't do this that I'm not thinking of, but let's just have all the primaries on the same day. There goes the lemming effect. Granted, no candidate will ever bother to visit Iowa again ... If they did that it would seriously affect the amount of money a candidate could effectively spend; this would curtail the election industry greatly. It would also lessen the amount of power the contributors hold over the candidates who now can win without raising quite so much money. We can't have that now can we? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #10 September 3, 2007 What is bumming me even more is the fact that I am almost completely unimpressed with every candidate running. This is the first time in 80 years we don't have an imcumbent running. It should be exciting....it's not. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #11 September 4, 2007 > but let's just have all the primaries on the same day. It's just like people like you to not consult God before making your silly suggestions! Bill Richardson (governor of New Mexico) explains: "Iowa, for good reason, for constitutional reasons, for reasons related to the Lord, should be the first caucus and primary." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #12 September 5, 2007 Quote > but let's just have all the primaries on the same day. It's just like people like you to not consult God before making your silly suggestions! Bill Richardson (governor of New Mexico) explains: "Iowa, for good reason, for constitutional reasons, for reasons related to the Lord, should be the first caucus and primary." Thanks for making me laugh tonight, Bill. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
