Can someone tell me WHY New Hampshire

[lost-in-nj]

is telling me who I can and can not vote for??
:shrug: :shrug:

Primaries should be held in all 50 states and DC on the same night....
I HATE that these voters can make or break a candidate....

really....

who are they???


lost

[TwilightZone]

1. I thought that it was decided by Iowa?

[Earth_First]

2. Sounds like someone needs their chocolate ration readjusted...

(Independent though alarm in sector 7G)

[HysteryDiagnosis]

3. There should be no primaries, they corrupt and taint. There should be

no polls, they reveal doubtful facts. There should be no indication as to who the president will be until the day after we vote. Our system is polled to death, surveyed to death and primaried to the point of stupidity. Our system is in a word STUPID. Not only does it waste hundreds of millions of dollars, it corrupts what is supposed to be a clear cut way of electing a leader. Polls??? We don't need no steeenking polls, primaries or people on teewee discussing it to death.

[harmonicon]

4. because it's small state with a white population?

Easy for the media to get a handle on and control? Assured to do nothing too crazy even if the media can't get control?

[Saturday]

5. They get to tell us because....

they supply all of our countertops.




Get it? The granite state. I make myself laugh sometimes. ;)

[madrchsod]

8. don`t quit your day job...

[Saturday]

9. Why didn't you tell me that 3 years ago before I retired?n/t

[madrchsod]

21. dam you are retired...i`ve got a few more years then

i can do what i want because i`ll have universal health care! it`s just the years between that really sucks when one can`t find a job in bush`s full employment economy

[lost-in-nj]

10. Why???

because I am thinking....
progressivly...???

stirring things up?????


think about it.......

do you want other people to choose the candidate you have to vote for????

I don't


lost

[SammyWinstonJack]

6. I was wondering the same thing? Why aren't primaries held on the same day, just as in the GE?

Give all of us the same opportunity to pick our nominee. :shrug:

[LisaM]

7. Dixville Notch must be a terrible place to live

You get such undue influence on candidates by residing there, you'd think they could at least get the population up to 90, or the number of voters up to 20, but they can't seem to crack those numbers.

My countertops must have been supplied by the Pink Tile State (yes, we rent).

[Breeze54]

11. "They" aren't telling you do anything but that's the rules of the committee. NV & SC have been added

but the primaries are just the beginning.

That's why there was all the hullabaloo for states to move up their primary dates.

Iowa is on the west coast... New Hampshire is the the east coast

It's just a sample .. a taking of the pulse, if you will

and more states have been added to that taste test.

It ain't over until it's over on 11-04-08 !!

[LisaM]

12. Iowa is on the West Coast? What are you talking about?

It's landlocked. And it's nowhere near the West.

[Breeze54]

18. Oh pleazze... it is west of the Mississippi and west of Boston!

:P

[aikoaiko]

26. When I grew up in NJ near NYC, I thought the wild west started west of the Garden State Parkway

Anything west of that was "western".

[SPKrazy]

14. Did the west fall off in the ocean?

and Iowa is on the coast now?

:shrug:

;)


:hi:

[Breeze54]

19. Funny!

:P

You know what I mean! :rofl:

[madrchsod]

24. anything west of the Alleghenies is the "west"

the land between the Alleghenies and the Rockie mountains is a vast wasteland.......

[lost-in-nj]

28. OK not sure about Iowa!! LOL

BUT
when a candidate pulls out of the race after one of these primaries....
I don't have the OPTION to vote for them....
and I do not think its fair......


lost

[SPKrazy]

13. I agree !!!!

there should be some method for all 50 states to be able to vote at least within the same week or something, because, Iowa, New Hampshire???

come on man

I only had Kerry and Kucinich on my ballot in my primary last time :grr:

I wanted someone else!!!!!!

:shrug:

needs an overhaul!!!!!

our primary, caucus system

not the backroom smoke filled deal making of the past either.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. This is what I was told ---

"Because small state primaries protects the democratic process
for lesser known, poorly funded candidates. A one-day primary would have all the candidates campaigning only in the tope 5 states, and the one with the biggest TV ad budget would win, every time. That's not democratic.

We need to preserve the small state early primaries. Now, rotating between small states is something I could get behind - no reason why IA/NH can't be ND/VT or NM/RI. Just so long as we don't let the big guns swamp the 3rd tier in the first week of campaigning. When we lose the message of the lesser lights it hurts us all. "


I did not respond to the post.

[Breeze54]

20. That makes a lot of sense as ABC is declaring McCain the winner right now!! WTF???

:wtf:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

27. That is what I thought, hence I did not respond to the poster

A longtime DUer told me that. It is in my journal.

eidted for typos and spelling issues

[Poiuyt]

16. The problem with having all the primaries on the same day is that only the wealthy

candidates (that is, candidates with a lot of donations) would be able to compete. They would have to do the campaigning with national TV ads rather than one on one. They wouldn't be able to go to the little dinners and personally meet the people.

That said, I agree with you. I live in Wisconsin so the nominees will have been determined well before I go to vote. There has to be a better way.

[salin]

17. how is it any different than all the Feb 5 voters in the super primary

finalizing the deal for who can be voted for, for all the rest of the states who don't vote until after that date - stretching through May?

We have a staggered system - for better or worse - and someone has to early on.

Hey if you are in NJ - you get to vote three months before I do. I know your frustration. There has got to be a better way of running/scheduling primaries.

[LisaM]

22. I think it should be like the NFL draft

Whichever states are having the hardest time get to go first. It's only fair. Plus, then the early money would be spent in the struggling states.

[lovuian]

23. its absurd

I agree

[KharmaTrain]

25. It's Better Than What Existed Before...The Smoke Filled Room

New Hampshire should always be appreciated as the first state to open up the presidential nomination process to the voters. Before that, nominees were selected by party bosses with little to no input from the rank and file.

I've long favored a more equitable primary schedule...either setting up groups of states in various regions between mid April to early June (when weather makes it easier to vote) and the states are rotated from year to year so no one state dominates. There is a part of me that favors using the smaller states in the first round as these places allow for true retail politics...the folks in Iowa and New Hampshire have spent a lot of time vetting the candidates and I see other states capable of serving in the same purpose.

I expect the primary system will be revamped in 2012...the mad scamble for dates this year has created this inbalanced torture track. I suspect the DNC and RNC will assert lots of pressure to have a more equitable schedule the next time around.