As a change of pace, let's talk not about the candidates, but the system as a whole. Who here supports a National Primary?
I believe that we are currently employing an unfit system that does not give voice to our country as a whole. Too much importance is placed on the early contests like New Hampshire and Iowa, which do not represent the whole country. They are white, rural states and having them determine who will be each party's nominee is unfair and undemocratic. We have all seen so many candidates drop out after getting trounced in early states, when having other states go first could have lead to an entirely different outcome. Proponents of our current system play up that state and local issues are at the forefront of the nomination, something that can sometimes be lost in national elections. But, these candidates are running for just that, President of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. So it pains me to see candidates tailor their platforms to each individual state, then move onto the next state and completely change the dialogue. This a national political office, and so the candidate should have a national campaign. And just how sincere is the candidate being when they bring up local/state issues in each state? The website http://www.nationalprimary.info/ cites a The Economist article: "A good example is 'one topic all presidential candidates agree on in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses (is) ethanol production is a very good thing and should be handsomly subsidized' (The Economist, 2004, pg. 24). Did they all think that way before running for President?" I, for one, highly doubt it.
So, in sum, I feel that our nominating process for President should mirror our process for selecting the President in November, with a national vote on the same day. Most other nominating processes in each state are done this way, from the Senate to the judiciary to State Legislatures. Why not Presidential primaries? I suggest all readers visit the aforementioned website (which seems to date back to 2004, but is still relevant in this year's heavily contested race). Go to http://www.nationalprimary.info/.
Your thoughts please on this highly important matter...
Monday, March 17, 2008
End the Charade with a National Primary
Categories:
national primary,
nomination,
president,
primary,
state issues
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree that the current system needs improvement. When states such as Florida and Michigan feel it is necessary to break the rules in order to be heard earlier, it is indicative that something is wrong.
A national primary would also eliminate the need to raise incredible amounts of capital in order to campaign in each state individually and would flesh out exactly which issues/ state truly were important to candidates because they would be forced to spend their limited time in states they were truly concerned with.
On the same token, I also believe that a primary that is stretched over months might, in some way, increase political awareness as there are new developments every week. It also give voters a chance too really see how candidates react under pressure and losses without ruling them out of the campaign.
It is a difficult situation to understand but something must be changed. Maybe a lottery for the order the states go in? Or a condensed schedule with maybe three separate dates instead of many. I don't know. The current one seems a little over-extended though and I like to see progress made as I always believe things can be improved.
Post a Comment