Saturday, October 13, 2007

December 11 Primary?

It now looks like New Hampshire is considering a December 11 primary rankling some Democrat leaders. DNC rules don't allow for presidential primaries before January 22, and now that New Hampshire is moving, Michigan is looking for a January 15 caucus or primary (they haven't yet decided on the format).

As a result of Michigan's January 15 date, some Democratic candidates are vowing to stay clear of Michigan and leave the campaigning to others. Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Edwards and Bill Richardson all took their names off the ballot in protest. Hillary Clinton kept her name on. Although Michigan has not traditionally been a key state, removing oneself from the ballot seems like an extreme and foolhearty way to make a point. Hillary, wisely, shows she is in this race to win—further evidence that she will use her wits to take all the marbles for the Dems.


Sirocco said...

The entire situation is just getting silly.

Liza said...

We certainly saw in 2004 how everyone just fell in line and elected John Kerry after the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries. Given the electoral clout as well as the demographics of these two states, it just doesn't make sense.

I cannot begin to understand why this happens, but given that it sometimes does, I would agree that the Democrats need to take a hard look at how they nominate presidential candidates in the 21st century.

In the absence of a better plan, it would be reasonable to select the states for the first round of presidential primaries on some kind of rotational basis. But this should not be completely random. There should be representation by geographical area as well as large and smaller states.

My personal opinion that is not shared with anyone else in the country is that the state of California should always be in the first round of primaries. The bottom line is that over 10% of the population lives there, and if you really want to know who the people want, that primary will tell you. I think that the California primary should be held before there is influence from preceding primaries.

The Democrats need to fix this problem, and fast.

Sirocco said...


FWIW Dean has already stated Dems need to resolve all this prior to the 2012 elections.

Liza said...

I guess it was too much to ask that they recognize how important 2008 is to the nation and the world.

Sirocco said...

Unfair ...purely as a practical matter, it's really impossible at this point to change the governing bylaws, etc.

Liza said...

Disagree...they should have started in 2004 and that's not hindsight. There was a LOT of discussion about this after the election, the discussion faded, and the Democrats sat on their hands as usual.

Sirocco said...

Hmmm ... I honestly don't recall this being an issue in 2004. However, certainly by the time Dean made that statement (within the past week), it wasn't doable.

Remember too - this is not a matter Dems or the DNC have total control over either.

Liza said...

I was volunteering for the Dems back then. There were a lot of active Democrats who believed this to be a major problem and wanted change. I remember seeing at least one article in the newspaper, but this isn't exactly news until it's news, and nothing happened. So here we are.