|
Post by firstwd on Feb 4, 2008 11:38:06 GMT -5
Over the weekend I heard a report that Romney was asking Huckabee to drop out of the race because he was taking votes away the Romney needed to be able to beat McCain.
I decided that statement, as well as the current system, bothers me.
Why is the Primary system set up the way it is. I understand that years ago the only way to campaign was to get out and beat the pavement. Those days are over. I am more than a little bothered that my vote is meaningless when it comes to who I want as the Candidate for my party.
I would like to see some sort of Federal Law putting all Presidential Primary's on the exact same day. Honestly, how could any elected official argue with this idea. The only reason they would have to not support such an effort would be to argue that not every one's opinion and vote matters.
Where are our letter writers? Can we get something to present to our elected officials for enact this change?
|
|
|
Post by duff on Feb 4, 2008 11:45:15 GMT -5
So if you voted on the same day as the rest of the country, do you think your vote would hold any more value? Why?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 4, 2008 11:52:03 GMT -5
I think all states' primaries on one day is an excellent idea.
At least our state would get a little more attention than we do now.
Why should Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina "weed out the candidates" for us?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 4, 2008 11:56:37 GMT -5
Over the weekend I heard a report that Romney was asking Huckabee to drop out of the race because he was taking votes away the Romney needed to be able to beat McCain. I decided that statement, as well as the current system, bothers me. I'm sure that Huckabee being the polite person he is did not tell Romney where to stick it. Not a while lot of difference in delegate counts between Huckabee and Romney. Of the three I MUCH prefer Huckabee (or Paul), but he is not "electable" in the general election. I notice that Obama is spending lots of money right and left. He is even showing up here on HI in the Google ads. Do you think he can convince anyone here to vote for him?
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Feb 4, 2008 12:19:43 GMT -5
I think all states' primaries on one day is an excellent idea. At least our state would get a little more attention than we do now. Why should Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina "weed out the candidates" for us? This is what I was thinking too, plus there is less chance to "strategize" among contenders before some states get to vote, making the people's voice as a unit more important. Yeah, his ad came up for me too...it's a waste of electrons around here.
|
|
|
Post by Sasquatch on Feb 4, 2008 12:20:00 GMT -5
It is a wierd system. But keep in mind that the liberals hate the Iowa routine, because it gives "rural" people too much say. I even heard a news commentator say, "It doesn't make sense to me that a state where people ride snowmobiles and grow corn get to pick our next president." In other words, more populated, urban states should get more say.
If we are not careful, they'll set it up to where Mexifornia gets even more say in who runs. Do we want that?
|
|
|
Post by duckhunterpaul on Feb 4, 2008 12:20:21 GMT -5
I was kinda scared there for a minute Woody, I thought you put that OBAMA ad on the sight.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Feb 4, 2008 12:24:36 GMT -5
"Only 3 things scare me!" 1. Osama 2. Obama 3. Yo Mama (Hillary)
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 4, 2008 12:31:37 GMT -5
I was kinda scared there for a minute Woody, I thought you put that OBAMA ad on the sight. Not in this lifetime..
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Feb 4, 2008 12:34:12 GMT -5
I personally will at least feel like my vote carried more wieght if I actually got an opportunity to choose from all of the poeple who decide to run.
I also do not like the deligate system. I think it should go on popular vote alone. I know that this system would have put Al Gore in the White House, but I think it is the most fair way to let people feel like their vote actually counts. The system we have now puts too much weight on what a few people in the Country thinks.
I actually believe the media has too much say in who is determined the "front runners" and who should and shouldn't be in this race. Like Woody said, Huckabee and Romney are very close on their delicate count, yet the media puts Romney and McCain as the front candidates.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Feb 4, 2008 13:07:40 GMT -5
"Only 3 things scare me!" 1. Osama 2. Obama 3. Yo Mama (Hillary) ;D
|
|
|
Post by duff on Feb 4, 2008 13:56:38 GMT -5
I agree with Sasquatch.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Feb 4, 2008 14:17:50 GMT -5
I'm only speculating here so don't get too riled up. In Indiana (which is different than many other states) we have our actual federal primary in May coupled with our state primary. One defines delagates and candidates for federal elections and the other for state elections. I can see the day when voting (both state and federal) will be electronically from home. No more excuses on why you didn't vote. I actually favor the current system as it does weed out the non-contendors before we actually vote. You can still write in Ron Paul if you want to.
Anyway Indiana elects actual delagates (Iowa's caucus system for example does not). I don't believe there is any federal law that can force all the states to hold their presidential primary elections on the same day. Another issue would be the money needed to campaign for every state. Probably none of the candidates today could get the money for that.
Bottomline, I have no problem with the current system as my vote always counts one way or another. (I usually vote Dem in the primary and the correct way in the general election).
Jack
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Feb 4, 2008 14:52:47 GMT -5
"Only 3 things scare me!" 1. Osama 2. Obama 3. Yo Mama (Hillary) I wonder if Travis could photoshop them all into one...
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Feb 4, 2008 16:04:58 GMT -5
Since I think that Indiana is mostly a Democrat state when it comes to elections and I believe that more people originally registered the same way their parents voted. And in Indiana you have to vote the way that you registered in the primary's the best thing for those who are registered as Democratic to show their displeasure against either Hillary or Obama would be to vote for someone else if there is a third choice. Either that or re register to a different political party.
|
|
|
Post by treetop on Feb 4, 2008 16:25:24 GMT -5
Since I think that Indiana is mostly a Democrat state when it comes to elections and I believe that more people originally registered the same way their parents voted. And in Indiana you have to vote the way that you registered in the primary's the best thing for those who are registered as Democratic to show their displeasure against either Hillary or Obama would be to vote for someone else if there is a third choice. Either that or re register to a different political party. IMHO IN is not a Democrat State it may be were you live but as a whole I believe your wrong.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Feb 4, 2008 16:59:37 GMT -5
Since I think that Indiana is mostly a Democrat state when it comes to elections and I believe that more people originally registered the same way their parents voted. And in Indiana you have to vote the way that you registered in the primary's the best thing for those who are registered as Democratic to show their displeasure against either Hillary or Obama would be to vote for someone else if there is a third choice. Either that or re register to a different political party. We are most certainly not a Democrat state when it comes to presidental elections. Can not remember the last democrat presidental canidate who won Indiana. We might have a democrat for governor and our share of democrate elected officials but for president it is most certainly Republican.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Feb 4, 2008 19:27:55 GMT -5
Since I think that Indiana is mostly a Democrat state when it comes to elections and I believe that more people originally registered the same way their parents voted. And in Indiana you have to vote the way that you registered in the primary's the best thing for those who are registered as Democratic to show their displeasure against either Hillary or Obama would be to vote for someone else if there is a third choice. Either that or re register to a different political party. I'm not sure I follow your thought process here but I always declare myself a Democrat in the primary and ALWAYS vote for the Republican candidate. Been doing it that way for 40 years now. Jack P.S. You should see the hilarious Democratic emails I get as a declared one of them.
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Feb 4, 2008 20:17:58 GMT -5
Voting against a particularly unsavory candidate in an opposing party to keep them off the ballot is sometimes a tactic that works, IF enough voters can be persuaded to join in and IF you're assured that the candidate in your preferred party will win the nomination without needing your delegates. Only problem in this particular primary is I can't decide whether Clinton or Obama is the lesser of two evils. I totally agree with some others who commented about Indiana not holding much sway over who will get the nomination, but the date on which we vote has little to do with that. Because we might possibly want to nominate a Ron Paul, for example, doesn't mean he would stand a better chance of being around after the rest of the country voted. Iowa, although the first state to hold a primary, has had little affect on the outcome to date. Considering our population, we shouldn't affect the outcome as much as California, New York, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and other more populated states. The process is indeed confusing and complicated, but nevertheless reflects a pretty true popular vote. The real problem with the primaries IMHO, is the power of the media. A long, drawn out time between the beginning and end to the primaries gives the media a lot to think about and a lot to spin on. Too few people do their homework and only rely on media reports (obviously biased) on which to base their voting decisions.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Feb 4, 2008 22:27:00 GMT -5
Indiana is a "flyover" state during the general election campaigning right now. We would be treated the same way during a primary.
Jack
|
|