I don't understand...
...the prioritization of one state over another in the election primary process.
My friends will be voting in Michigan tomorrow (actually, knowing them, this is unlikely), but thanks to this, Michiganders who vote Democratic won't have much of a choice...and their vote might not matter, anyway.
I understand that MI and FL violated party rules, and maybe it was a power grab. What I don't understand is why it's so imperative that Iowa and New Hampshire always go first. I've never heard a convincing argument in favor of this. I think I'd rather see the candidates run a national campaign instead of spending the majority of their time in two small states engaged in pandering coffee klatsch nostalgia.
Anyone want to convince me that this is a good idea?
My friends will be voting in Michigan tomorrow (actually, knowing them, this is unlikely), but thanks to this, Michiganders who vote Democratic won't have much of a choice...and their vote might not matter, anyway.
I understand that MI and FL violated party rules, and maybe it was a power grab. What I don't understand is why it's so imperative that Iowa and New Hampshire always go first. I've never heard a convincing argument in favor of this. I think I'd rather see the candidates run a national campaign instead of spending the majority of their time in two small states engaged in pandering coffee klatsch nostalgia.
Anyone want to convince me that this is a good idea?
posted by Pj at 12:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home