Posted on 01/06/2016 12:34:48 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
Here's a news flash. The Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary will not matter this year, at least not in the way they've mattered every four years for as long as I can remember. You can take that to the bank.
Allow me to explain.
First, have you ever wondered why two small and -- in general terms, politically irrelevant -- states have such a profound impact on primary politics? Have you ever wondered why those two states, Iowa and New Hampshire, are like politics' own Kardashians -- famous because they're well-known, rather than for any innate value they bring to presidential politics.
Though neither state is representative of America at large, they're famous as the primary season's giant killers, taking down the seemingly most powerful primary candidates, generally on what seems like a whim.
Iowa's caucuses are almost bizarre in their byzantine complexity, and those caucuses only bring out the hard-core among primary-season voters. As a Nevada voter -- we have caucuses too -- I think the process is a bit strange; but Iowa takes that strangeness to an extreme. Instead of checking off a ballot and dropping it in a box, a caucus voter has to commit to several hours of interaction with neighbors and strangers, usually on a bitterly cold winter's night. Those who show up aren't really representative of Iowa voters, let alone America's voters. But they've managed to secure a seemingly unshakable "First in the Nation" status, and the media -- and political operatives -- take them seriously.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I think you’ve made a few flawed assumptions. First, Trump’s biggest business asset is his “talking” - his reality show has been what greatly magnified the value of the name Trump. It was a master stroke, but it does not necessarily portend an understanding of macro economics. His support of TARP, Stimulus, all the bail outs and KELO indicates a clear LACK of understanding of the little guy.
And yet the little guy loves him. Damndest thing I’ve ever seen.
Your shortchange of Cruz is also intellectually lazy and shallow.
So, okay, move up a more conservative Western State like Oklahoma close to Iowa's date, and pair NH with South Carolina. Voila'! "Balance"!
Oklahoma is more Southern than Western. We’re a Southwestern state culturally.
>> so many NH residents came from NY or Conn
Liberalism is a malignancy, yes indeed.
California liberals have metastasized to several western states. Colorado is one dysfunctional example.
Thanks be to GOD that Texas doesn’t have good skiing. Good skiing seems to attract liberal douchebags like dogs attract fleas.
A lot of people don't get it yet. Trump would be a vast, cosmic improvement over the malignant and malevolent Obama, but he'd still be a Yacht Club Republicrat with a pen and a phone and a media presence (established, unlike Obama's, against hostile media bias).
Critics of Trump have been making the consequentialist case against Trump, that people sick of Obama are willing to settle for another publicity hound just because he's running as an anti-Obama, who might turn out to be uncomfortably Mittensesque, or even Rockefellerian, in his policies and politics if elected. That includes schmoozing with CFR-connected Trilateral schmooze artists and Chinese tycoons.
Oh, and did I mention that guys like that are the ones the Pew sociologists found weakest on RKBA, of all the pieces and chunks of the Republican coalition? (That was back in 1999.)
.....and none of them will understand a single syllable of what you wrote.
But then, you knew that.....
Excellent history post, and absolutely no coincidence that shortly afterwards, Edwards was fully revealed as a cheating slime and ruthlessly savaged by the media. Edwards had crossed the Clintons and paid the price.
The author of The Confederate Outlaw Josey Wales pointed out in popular literature what Yankee "historians" like to gloss over, that the "civilized tribes" of Oklahoma back then declared war on the United States and separated their Territory from U.S. administration, joining the Confederacy. They surrendered the last battalion-sized Confederate formation nearly two months after Appomattox and several weeks after the Texas Militia and state troops disbanded and went home, and after Jo Shelby sank his cavalry colors in the Rio Grande and went into exile in Mexico.
...and let’s not forget Bernankian, Sandersesque, Schumerian, etc.....
I agree on election day being one day - or maybe two - but no more than that. You're right. It invites not only cheating, but also guarantees that more uninformed voters will muddy the process.
But Ann, there is a TERRIBLE CONSEQUENCE to having your primary plan in place. Know what it is?
No...what is it?
Sandersesque?! Surely not! And Schumerian? <backing up> That's courting a lawsuit, now. No, don't say that! OMG ... "Schmucky Chucky"?
First, let me say I hate the system we have now, and I fully feel you on the frustration. But there are better solutions - and frankly - there’s already talk of scrapping the Iowa/NH start for next cycle.....which I’ve been in favor of for a LONG time.
But your solution would fail as a test of time measure....and it would greatly magnify the power of those who entered the process with a lot of name ID and money.
Now perhaps social media and cable and talk radio and so on are making this less the case.....but there are unintended consequences with one national primary day.
The results from both Iowa and New Hampshire may convey more information than may be expected. Rather than looking at specific candidates look at issues espoused by the highest vote getters. I think that this election more than those in the recent past will be determined by issues which have great emotional content.
Think of the money it would take to campaign nationally for a single day primary. I like the gauntlet that the candidates have to run. Small media markets like Iowa and NH are a good way to cull the weak and yet a way for those less known to step forward.
I disagree. I have heard enough from ALL the candidates to make a decision.
So why even have primaries? Madison, Wisconsin is a bastion of demodummies but the rest of the state is usually Republican. Don’t judge the entire state by Madison, WI.
The county I live in has approximately 23,000 population (yes we are small) and is mostly conservative but voters in the county seat of 8100 is akin to Madison, “demodummies” so this county is then crowned as “democrat”? Those 8100 people DO NOT represent the entire country. Same goes for primaries. Does a small sample of the population tell you what the entire voting population wants?
I’m sure you are - but you are part of a small minority who follows this stuff. If we were having a national primary day on Feb 1, LOTS of uninformed voters would dilute your informed vote.
PLUS, by definition we haven’t seen yet how these candidates handle defeat, or victory, in a given primary or caucus. These are valuable moments.
Before you attack, this is a question...is Cruz wife not a party to CFR also. And her Goldman Sach position is not one most Americans will ever aspire to hold.
Back calling names I see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.