Somebody wins IOWA then NEW HAMPSHIRE and the process is OVER?

[Tyler Durden]

Corn farmers IN COMMITTEE trying to keep an Ethanol subsidy (DON'T get me started) and a New England State with less than the population of Detroit.

Somebody wins one or both and the nomination process is OVER? Bull Shit.

As a resident of Michigan, where MY RIGHTS to the process have been scuttled thanks to a State that is still the but of jokes when someone needs to stereotype a hick and a state with all the population and diversity of Toledo. And don't start with this "breaking the rules that you agreed to" garbage. Party Flacks decided this. Yeah, they can go f... themselves while they're at it.

Well, I've had it.

If this stands without revision for the next process, and I mean it doesn't get fixed PRETTY GOD DAMNED SOON, you can bet that ol' Tyler, the last of the Democratic Socialist YELLOW DOG DEMOCRATS will go "Indy" once and for all.

I won't pull Walt's idiot move, I'll just quietly leave.

Truly. This is no threat, and I know there are a TON of people here who would do the same if there was a viable independent party option; note that I no longer CARE about viable, as if I will be tilting at windmills and fighting for lost causes inside the party, I might as well go where if I say something, someone is actually LISTENING.

As for now, I will continue to support the Democratic Party Nominee; what other choice do we have? But their time on MY clock is running out.

[Jokerman]

1. K&R from another disenfranchised midwesterner

I have NEVER had even the opportunity for my vote to count in a presidential primary. It's always over long before we get a chance to vote.

[Tyler Durden]

2. Things like this SPUR the 3rd party movement.

I don't want another "Green Party" debacle. It's far past time we had a real choice, and RULES CHANGE in the LEGISLATURE that makes the possibility of a COALITION MAJORITY in the House or Senate a true possibility.

[onehandle]

3. Not for Bill Clinton in 1992.

He didn't go to Iowa and lost New Hampshire.

I seem to remember it didn't end there...

[ccpup]

6. you're right

he lost the three States after that, finally had his first win in Georgia and then went on to do very, very well on Super Tuesday.

And everyone and their Mother was begging him to throw in the towel after he lost New Hampshire.

[Tyler Durden]

7. Tell that to the Obama supporters.

According to them, Christ gets anointed in downtown Concord after he wins the primary.

Sorry, I'm just getting a little tired of some people's enthusiasm for someone who looks to me like just another politico.

[Pale Blue Dot]

12. So is it the process or the candidate?

I assume that you still would have started this thread if it was your candidate out in front right now. Right?

[Tyler Durden]

16. I don't support ANY of them, with the possible exception of...

Edwards over the pack, with Kucinich 2nd.

Although Kucinich REALLY pissed me off with his "support Obama if not me" BS in Iowa. Bad show in my book.

But do I like ANY of them? Nope. Not very much. More a matter of who stinketh the least. AGAIN. And AGAIN.

And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN
And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN
And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN
And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN
And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN And AGAIN

[SammyWinstonJack]

17. They do act like his is an inevitable outcome with regard too the Dem nomination, don't they?

And after just one caucus and a yet too be, primary win? I think that is what turns me off the most about him.

[Tyler Durden]

24. They forget that PRIDE is one of the seven deadly sins....

And that HUBRIS always precedes the downfall of the hero in classical tragedy.

[Arugula Latte]

66. The whole Inevitability thing really turned me further against Clinton.

It's so annoying when someone acts like: "Just accept X. S/he will be the nominee."

I got that a few times this Fall in regard to Hillary. So much so that I was convinced we'd have no choice, that the Dem. establishment WOULD be able to shove her down our throats.

[Dorian Gray]

37. Yeah...

but the process ISN'T yet over. And they're giddy because they support him. But, a lot can happen between now and the end of the primaries. So, I wouldn't go down in flames yet.

[rox63]

4. I don't think this fight will be over until the 2/5/08 primaries happen

That sucks for those whose primaries are after that date. But both sides of the aisle have multiple viable candidates, and there are still no clear winners.

[ccpup]

5. yep

if you're an Obama Supporter and he wins the first two, then he'd rather not have to actually work to get your vote as well. Better everyone just thrown in the towel and make his Coronation that much easier, you know?

I actually think the later Primary States WILL be more important -- imagine that! -- than first expected. Especially as Obama begins to stumble (he will as it's inevitable) and Hillary takes advantage of that (she will as it's inevitable) in the Super Tuesday States and the March/April States.

Two Primaries does not a President make.

[Tyler Durden]

11. You mean like....

Quibbling over NOT EMPLOYING LOBBYISTS, by claiming that Demer is a STATE LOBBYIST not FEDERAL? He worked for a DRUG COMPANY. How national can you get?

Not to mention the "McClurkin Affair" that EVERYONE would rather went back in "The Closet."

Why doesn't anyone remember Obama's vote FOR the "Patriot" Act, either?

[libbygurl]

15. Obamites were hot and ready to crown their candidate after Iowa!

Some were already speculating about who his running mate would be after last week's caucus!

Gawd, can everyone here have a reality check, please?

[havocmom]

30. how many months of Hill-bots (and corporate media) insisting she was 'inevitable'

before New Year's day?

All spin and trying to hypnotize the masses. And all to reminiscent of a newt/rove/goebbels strategy of telling us what reality is instead of facing reality

[libbygurl]

34. Sorry, but I wasn't part of that media, just a regular DU member here.

Reality will make itself known once the primaries are over. We should all wait for that moment.

[havocmom]

48. That's correct: whe shold wait for that moment. But it's not what many here have done, is it

HRC = inevitable has been the mantra of many around here and on the TV news for months now. No denying THAT reality.

[ccpup]

53. I have yet to find one "Hill-bot"

who EVER said she was inevitable. That word -- along with Coronation -- was thrown around by the corp media, to some extent, and for the most part by people who support other Candidates and/or are violently anti-Hillary.

But not by her Supporters and certainly not by Hillary herself. She's always believed it would be a long contest with the Polls eventually tightening and a fight to the finish.

[havocmom]

58. many here have seen it

but if you didn't, guess it doesn't exist.

[ccpup]

59. yes, it's been here

but not by those who support Hillary. If you can highlight an example, I'd gladly apologize. But her alleged inevitability was an issue hammered again and again by those who were and are against her, not supporting her.

[DangerDave921]

35. 36 years

In the past 36 years, no one who has won BOTH Iowa and NH has failed to get the nomination. This is true for Dems and Repubs. Now I don't know how many times that has happened, but if Obama wins NH, history is on his side.

[ccpup]

44. one can't ignore the fact, though,

that one isn't prevented from getting the Nomination if one doesn't win either of those ... or both. It's happened before and it can happen again.

[Tyler Durden]

45. Exactly my point.

I am SICK to DEATH of this Iowa/New Hampshire "head of the line" privilege.

Time for it to STOP.

[DangerDave921]

54. how?

How does it stop if history tends to show that it's relevant? It's not etched in stone, but it certainly has some serious relevance if a candidate wins both Iowa and HH.

Should no one even mention the fact that he's won two primaries in a row (assuming he wins NH)?

This is just political talk, just like callers to a sports talk station. We deal in theories, considerations, hypotheticals, history, etc. It's called talking. It doesn't change the actual results so relax.

[Tyler Durden]

60. Regional Primaries, Paired, and rotating.

Simple.

[Bitwit1234]

8. You know the media.....

trying to make something out of nothing. I posted this several times but the Obama dancers think they can psych people into stop voting.

Since they started the process in 1952 not one single solitary candidate except bush and we all know why there, has won the Iowa and NH primaries and went on to become THE candidate. Those winning the two primaries faded and dropped off the radar.

You are 100% correct Iowa and New Hampshire do not represent this country. Neither share the views of the rest of this country.

I don't understand why Iowa was such a big deal. If Obama and Oprah hadn't paid to bus all those students in to vote and then send them back home, he wouldn't have won. And we all know why he is ahead in NH. Let's wait til he goes into a real state and tries to win. And of course. He can't bus students into real states. The haphazard way students are allowed to vote in Iowa I suppose the candidates have learned that if they can pay to have enough students, who probably never ever voted and won't in the general bussed in they could win a primary. It will be interesting to see just what kind of mess Obama has started. What with the republicans and their dirty tricks. Hard to tell where they will get their "students" next time.

[TheDoorbellRang]

49. Wow. I bet Iowans and New Hampshire folk wish

they could live in a real state, too. So sad for them.

So which states, in your opinion, are real?

[Tyler Durden]

55. Hey, we'd just like to have our opinions COUNT for a change.

AND we get a little pissed about it from time to time, so excuse the fuck out of ME.

Nothing personal intended.

[TheDoorbellRang]

63. Since we still have the electoral college

your chances are greatly reduced of having your vote matter so much, unless you're in a purple state. I'm in my mid fifties, and it wasn't until last year when I was still living in Missouri that I felt my vote counted -- I supported McCaskill.

I've lived in Iowa, Missouri, and Illinois -- and I can say that Iowans take their politics very seriously. If we continue with the current system of early bellwether primaries/caucuses in early states, Iowa would get my vote. It still beats the old system of picking the candidate in some back room by TPTB.

The system does need revamping, but if the primaries were all done on the same day, moneyless candidates would never get out of the shoot. IMO, we need to dump the electoral college and have campaigns publicly financed, not direct our anger at Iowa and New Hampshire by castigating them as not real states. That's just silly.

[Tyler Durden]

69. It has to start SOMEWHERE....

And it is "Back Room" to make rules that preclude some state from a primary process because po' li'l Iowa wanna go FUST!!!

I'm in my mid fifties as well, if that counts for anything these days. And a CAUCUS is BALONEY for picking candidates. The Iowa Caucuses have SPOKEN.

FUGEDDABOUDIT.

[marmar]

9. Agree....but I suspect that Toledo is much more diverse than New Hampshire.

(Not poking fun at NH, just making a factual observation)

[Tyler Durden]

13. Yeah, bad example.

Toledo just gets a "pass" and Detroit takes it on the chin so much, I wanted to use another medium sized city on the slump.

[OHdem10]

10. Bloomberg seems to be elites idea of an Independent

and something tells me this is not good.

I too feel as though I am about ready to drop out of
politics for good. We are setting it up and the Media
has pushed the race---The table is set for a GOP win
in the GE.

[DU9598]

14. It is far from over

One gaffe and the media will take down Obama.

There is a serious patience deficit around here.

[bdamomma]

31. for sure the media will take him down

nothing against Obama, but is Obama the new Dean, remember how everyone was for him, and then it changed very quickly.

Edwards is not out either.

[zeemike]

18. Don't laugh but I just thought of a dream scenario.

After the primaries the vote is so split that no candidate can be elected and the convention is dead locked. Then someone purposes to draft Al Gore and it passes and Gore wins the nomination, selects Edwards as VP and wins in a landslide in 08.
I can dream can't I?

[Tyler Durden]

21. "Don't torture me, Ethyl."

Al Gore was the only candidate I could conceive of (with the possible exception of Clark from the last time) that I wouldn't have to hold my nose and vote for.

[Tyler Durden]

19. Not wanting to PANDER here....

But how about at least a #5 vote? Jeez, most of this kind of dissent is making it past being LOCKED, let alone being seen at all for more than about 5 minutes.

[EstimatedProphet]

20. Yep, that's it.

Iowa, then New Hampshire. Then the election in November. Nothing else really counts. Don't bother to vote in your primary, because it will all be decided by then.

[Tyler Durden]

23. I don't get to vote for ANYONE but HILARY.

I live in MICHIGAN remember? We've been BAD so we get to sit in the corner while everyone else is at recess.

[EstimatedProphet]

25. Well then it doesn't matter really.

Because everything is over after New Hampshire. So you don't have to stand in line at the voting booth. Aren't you lucky?

[Breeze54]

27. You can vote for Kucinich!

Write-in vote will spoil Michigan ballot

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/NEWS07/801050314/1009

Michigan voters getting absentee ballots for the state's Jan. 15 presidential primary have four Democratic choices

- Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, Chris Dodd (who dropped out of the race Thursday) and Mike Gravel.

That's because Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden (who also dropped out this week) removed their names from the ballot last fall.

[Tyler Durden]

28. I would if it meant anything.

Do you really think it does at this point?

Besides, ol' Den wants me to support Obama. I won't type what I think of that.

No, I'll be doing a write in for the very first time.

[Breeze54]

33. Yes, it willl matter in November!

So, what should their supporters do?

Don't write in a candidate's name. Your ballot will be thrown out.
Detroit officials say they're already seeing a lot of spoiled ballots.

State Democratic Party officials recommend a vote for "Uncommitted."
If at least 15% of voters do that in any congressional district, they'll be represented.

The second option is voting Republican.

[Tyler Durden]

40. Then I'll do that.

Thanks for the heads up.

[madinmaryland]

22. I've been voting in primaries since 1980, and I have never voted

in one that actually mattered. Ohio, Connecticut, and Maryland. It's always been wrapped up by the time it is primary day in my state. :grr:

[Tyler Durden]

26. I've been voting in primaries since 1972....

And my "Guy" has NEVER been the nominee.

[madinmaryland]

38. Even if my candidate was the eventual nominee, it has already

been decided by the primary time in my state. I would sometime like for my primary vote to actually matter.

It doesn't help that the MSM makes such a big deal of two small states.

[bdamomma]

29. that's what the Media is believing, but this race has just begun.

[jberryhill]

32. No.. who said otherwise?

Plenty of candidates have not done well in Iowa or New Hampshire and come back strongly - Bill Clinton, for example.

The only person capable of disenfranchising you is YOURSELF, if you do not participate in the election of your state's convention delegates.

[Breeze54]

42. You didn't read the OP, did you. He lives in Michigan!!

Voters: 'It's like we don't count'

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080107/NEWS06/801070333

Democratic ballot in Mich. primary fuels anger, apathy

January 7, 2008

BY CHRIS CHRISTOFF

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

It's NASCAR on bicycles, Halloween with no costumes and Miss America without swimsuits.

Michigan's Democratic presidential primary on Jan. 15 is a contest in name only, with just

one major candidate -- Hillary Clinton -- on the ballot.

Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson decided not to participate in Michigan's primary because the state Democratic Party's decision to hold a primary before Feb. 5 violates national party rules. The Democratic National Committee has threatened to not seat Michigan's delegates at the national convention, though state party officials say that won't happen.

Clinton isn't campaigning in Michigan, in deference to the national party rules. The others on the Democratic ballot are also-rans: Kucinich and Mike Gravel, who are campaigning, and Chris Dodd, who's already withdrawn from the race.

On Jan. 15, supporters of Obama and Edwards can stay home, choose from one of the Democrats on the ballot, vote "uncommitted" (with no guarantee their preferred candidate will receive delegates at the national convention in August), or vote in the Republican primary.

[jberryhill]

72. Still... so?

Edwards, Obama, Richardson, and anyone else could have decided to participate in the MI primary.

Yes, it's a peeing contest between the DNC and the Michigan state party. Either the party gets to set the rules on how its nominee is appointed, or the party doesn't - and I also believe the rules are screwy and in need of review. Still, though, the nomination process is up to the party to decide.

[aikoaiko]

36. You're funny shouting about how you're going to leave quietly.

But I do agree that the caucus/primary system needs a change.

[Tyler Durden]

41. I'm very angry, but I don't remember shouting.

Work for the Democratic Party for as long as I have (since 1968) without ONCE seeing the candidate you support as the nominee and you'll get a little pissed off as well.

And I'm talking about leaving THE PARTY, and last I checked, lurking is ok and the Lounge is a little more accepting.

[oregonjen]

39. Oregon has it's primary in May

We have to wait until then to have a voice. By then, the race is over and the nominee will have been decided.

[Tyler Durden]

43. A truly ridiculous situation. n/t

[Rockholm]

46. 17% of Iowa voters pick for the rest of us. Not fair.

17% of Iowa is half the population of the city of Boston. WTF. I want to have my vote in the primary count.

[Rockholm]

47. 17% of Iowa voters pick for the rest of us. Not fair.

17% of Iowa is half the population of the city of Boston. WTF. I want to have my vote in the primary count.

Ugh, double post. There was some bug/error message. Someone must be messing with the Internets this morning.

[Eurobabe]

50. Time for Regionals

[Tyler Durden]

51. Clap, Clap, Clap!

LOVE it. Then the rest of us in the Great Blue Semi-North can counteract the effects of those folks in Ohio.

Hey, I was polite. Believe me it didn't start that way.

[Eurobabe]

56. Email Rep. Levin (MI) & Sen. Nelson (FL) this is from Presidential Primary Reform Bill

Why haven't we heard more about this? I first learned about it this past weekend!

Senator Nelson (D-FL) introduces companion bill, “Fair and Representative Presidential Primaries Act of 2007”

More here: http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/mi12_levin/PR090607.shtml

House Bill 1523 and the Senate bill, Fair and Representative Presidential Primary System of 2007 would create an interregional system for the selection of delegates to political party Presidential nominating conventions through caucuses or primaries.

The primary or caucus dates would be scheduled between March and June as follows: second Tuesday in March, first Tuesday in April, fourth Tuesday in April, second Tuesday in May, fourth Tuesday in May, second Tuesday in June

On each of the above dates, a state or group of smaller states from each region of the country would go on every day. Every election date would have a fair and representative presence from every region of the country.

One sub-region from each region would hold its caucus or primary on one of six dates between March and June of the Presidential Election year.

The regions and sub-regions are broken down below. This is not a regional primary system. Under this proposal, one group (A-F below) from each region would go on the same election date. This would be determined by lottery and rotate each cycle

Region 1: (A) Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont; (B) Massachusetts; (C) Connecticut, Rhode Island; (D) Delaware, New Jersey; (E) New York; (F) Pennsylvania

Region 2: (A) Maryland; (B) West Virginia; (C) Missouri; (D) Indiana; (E) Kentucky; (F) Tennessee

Region 3: (A) Ohio; (B) Illinois; (C) Michigan; (D) Wisconsin; (E) Iowa; (F) Minnesota

Region 4: (A) Texas; (B) Louisiana; (C) Arkansas, Oklahoma; (D) Colorado; (E) Kansas, Nebraska; (F) Arizona, New Mexico

Region 5: (A) Virginia; (B) North Carolina; (C) South Carolina; (D) Florida; (E) Georgia; (F) Mississippi, Alabama

Region 6: (A) California; (B) Washington; (C) Oregon; (D) Idaho, Nevada, Utah; (E) Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming; (F) Hawaii, Alaska

For the first Presidential election this Act would apply to, the Election Assistance Commission would determine by lottery the order in which each sub-region would hold its caucus or primary. If a state goes first during one cycle, it will go sixth (last) in the next cycle, and fifth in the following cycle, moving up one slot each cycle. During a 24-year rotation, then, every state will have occupied every primary and caucus slot exactly once.

[Tyler Durden]

61. Already did.

Liked the plan when I saw it, emailed Levin about 30 minutes ago.

[Eurobabe]

62. Excellent, I urge more people to make their voices heard

:hi:

[Eurobabe]

64. I tried to email Levin, but am not a constituent. So I emailed

Bill Nelson in FL. I will email my own Reps and Senators regarding this matter.

[Pachamama]

52. Only in the eyes of the Media and possibly the winner of both...but I have never understood how two

states such as Iowa and New Hampshire, even though they are fine states, could determine a national decision.

Then again, as a Californian, my opinion is that when Californians have spoken, is it over.... :eyes:

[Emit]

57. I live in Nevada.

I haven't heard any of MSM mention our early caucus having any impact on the outcome of the primary. I share your frustration in some ways.

[displacedtexan]

65. Ask Jesse jackson what can happen later on.

1988 (from wikipedia):

He captured 6.9 million votes and won 11 contests; seven primaries (Alabama, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Puerto Rico and Virginia) and four caucuses (Delaware, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont).<14>. Jackson also scored March victories in Alaska's caucuses and Texas's local conventions, despite losing the Texas primary.<1> <2> Some news accounts credit him with 13 wins. <3> Briefly, after he won 55% of the vote in the Michigan Democrat caucus, he was considered the frontrunner for the nomination, as he surpassed all the other candidates in total number of pledged delegates.

A lot can change during the primary season.

[NC_Nurse]

67. I'm with you. This process sucks.

I am seriously wondering why I should give a shit at this point. By the time NC votes in May, the candidates that I liked will all be gone.
Fuck.

[sentelle]

68. I think its about momentum

Iowa and New Hampshire are very different in their priorities.

New Hampshire tends to be very libertarian, somewhat conservative, and in general, it goes its own way. its all there in its motto "Live free or die".

Iowa tends toward family values (traditions not "family values") and the values of the midwest.

Being able to appeal to both types of voters is quite difficult, particularly if you are not talking from both sides of the mouth.

Winning both tends to make others think they have some popular support. People tend to group-think a bit. Individuals are always under pressure to conform, but with popular opinion (at least seemingly) on your side, you are under less pressure, (people start to conform to you).

You could have California and Wyoming be the two states, and it would also be reasonably precient in this manner, but Iowa and NH are the standard.

Me, personally, my vote probably won't matter, and I will vote for the eventual nominee, as long as the nominee remembers that not only corporations, but people are constituents too, and deserve to be protected from poor corporate ethics.

[radfringe]

70. MY 2-CENTS

if the rush to be 1st in nation primary hasn't highlighted the problem then nothing will.

next there will be scramble to be the 1st to vote in a general election... :eyes:


my suggestions:

1. national primary day - 1 day for voting/caucuses

2. divide country up into 4 groups - regional seems to be easiest to do, but then you have those who complain that some regions have larger states, number of delegates etc. alternative to regional would be by electoral votes, regardless of where the state is located. one large state grouped in with medium/small states. whatever method of division is decided - next you rotate the group voting every 4 years. Group 1 votes in jan, #2 in feb, #3 in March, #4 in April. 4 years later - group 2 votes in jan, #3 in feb, #4 in march, #1 in april.

3. the hell with primaries, just put all the candidates into a cage match, survivor gets the delegates

[killbotfactory]

71. If all the other voters like what they see

and rally around the person who keeps winning, state after state, then yes.