[centurion316]

I always take Dick "Toes" Morris with a big grain of salt. But, I think that he is on to something here. We are going to get the nominees that the early polls and the press deliver up to us. Frightening, since almost none of the American people are paying any attention to this and won't until its all over.

[RightWhale]

Meaning inflation in the political universe.

[stuartcr]

I think money always has been the king...

[TommyDale]

The entire idea of a "Super Primary" is the beginning of the end of our system. Thank our former party leaders for such campaign reform.

[ConservativeDude]

Wait...Are you saying that all the genius freepers who say that Hunter is going to emerge from nowhere and blaze to the nomination, are going to be wrong???!!

Surely not. After all, remember how the polls were wrong back in November? Remember how the GOP held the House and the Senate, Blackwell crushed Strickland in Ohio, Harris became a Senator, etc.?

[quantim]

I kind of like this. Anything that can potentially remove meddling by the MSM is a good thing.

[taxcontrol]

Primaries should be held April 15th - on tax day.

[RockinRight]

OK Newt...if you're reading this...DECLARE YOUR CANDIDACY NOW.

[aegiscg47]

I tend to agree. The era of comebacks in the primaries, debates being important, etc., is over. We're going to have a pretty good idea who the two candidates will be by Christmas, then the money will take over. The conventions are just coronation ceremonies and infomercials to get your spin out to the people who tune in for 30 seconds to see who the candidates actually are. If you're a supporter of Romney, McCain, Gingrich, or Hunter, you better help them gain some traction before Christmas or it will be all over before the first vote is even cast in a primary!

[AnotherUnixGeek]

We are going to get the nominees that the early polls and the press deliver up to us.

I'd be all in favor of a national primary day in which all states cast their primary ballots - there's no reason for states like Iowa and New Hampshire, which are hardly representative of the US as a whole, playing king-makers.

[LonePalm]

I think this may come back to bite one or both or the major parties.

Consider the situation where, very early on, a candidate locks up sufficient delegates to win the nomination. That candidate does something to self destruct making it a virtual certainty that they will not win the general election.

If the candidate doesn't withdraw, the party faces certain defeat. If the candidate does withdraw, the party risks putting an untested candidate on the ticket.

Spaced out primaries are a good training ground for the general election. The also ensure that the cream rises to the top slowly and is not boiled away in a flash of steam.

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

[Tanniker Smith]

There is a flip side to this: There won't be a negative effect from Iowa and New Hamsphire hanging like an albatross around their necks.

Meaning that it is quite possible to see several different winners in the various regions of the country. Only the frontrunners can compete everywhere. So the 'also-rans' won't compete everywhere. They'll concentrate their efforts and we could see upsets in some states. That'll force the "frontrunners" and the MSM to take notice.

Anything is possible. In 1988, Al Gore barnstormed the South leading up to Super Tuesday, which he won the majority of. It catipulted him from last place to third place behind Dukakis and Jackson. Granted, after that, he was a Super Thud and even the endorsement of Ed Koch couldn't help him in New York but he made himself a factor in the race.

[BarbaraS.]

I'm already sick of the 2008 election. If we select the candidates in February the whole country will be sick of them before November.
How late could someone enter the presidential race as an
independent?

[DustyMoment]

In effect, we will now have a national primary and the presidential nominating season will last only three weeks from start to finish.

The effect of this gigantic sea change will be that whoever is the frontrunner in each party by the fall of 2007 will be virtually certain to win the nomination because only the frontrunner can possibly hope to amass enough money to compete in half the country at once. Nobody but the likely winner in each party will be able to compete at that level on Feb. 5.

Money will now be king. Nothing else will count very much. If you can afford to run a national campaign three weeks after the first caucus, you will win. If you can’t, you’re doomed. And the polling that designates a frontrunner now will do much to determine the nominee.

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!!! Morris could not be more right on this. Dems are pushing this idea to limit our ability to really check out the candidates during the "beauty contest". As he notes, only those who already have a large campaign war chest have any real hope of making it through this manipulated "super Tuesday".

In essence, they want people to go to the primaries as ignorant about the candidates as possible. The whole thing also limits Hillary's exposure and ensures that she won't face any tough questions or fumbles while on the campaign trail.

If your state Lege is considering doing this, they need to hear from you NOW!!!!

[surely_you_jest]

We are going to get the nominees that the early polls and the press deliver up to us. Frightening, since almost none of the American people are paying any attention to this and won't until its all over.

This an the inherent flaw in a primary system. And the point LonePalm makes about an early primary winner subsequently self-destructing is another.

Of course, it was not always this way. The primary system we have now was, in essence, a result of the 1968 Democratic Convention where the anti Viet Nam War crowd asserted that they were frozen out of the nominating process. After the '68 election was over they got their way, the Dims nominated McGovern the next time around, and these activists became known as McGovernites.

For a long time afterward the Dims were dominated by their activist loony fringe, and they began a long period of well-deserved political exile. The problem with activist loony fringes is that they have little if anything in common with the mainstream American voter, and the mainstream voter tends to be put off by the loony fringes. Their interests are simply not in sync with one another.

My points here are that the system we have now does not have its roots in anything that we should regard as sacrosanct; that there are a number of inherent flaws in the system we have now and how it operates; and that it was not always done in this fashion.

I may be the only person here who would favor a return to the nominating conventions of old, but they did offer a number of advantages over the current system. The actual campaign did not begin before many voters were engaged in the process. The impact of activist loony fringes in candidate selection was reduced to something approaching their actual numbers. It cost a heck of a lot less money. The impact of the media was reduced. Adults made the ultimate decisions on candidate selection, generally based upon some form of political pragmatism as opposed to the ideologies of the loony fringes.

Sooner or later, our current process will collapse under its own weight. And when it does, what then? My hope is that the nominating convention of old returns in some form or another, is brought up to date, and once again the adults run the process.

[VRWCTexan]

Texas is also in the process of moving the election to Feb 5th 2008 as well

[TruthConquers]

I think this is a move by both parties to eliminate the influence of the "little guy" from the process of nomination for President. This has been going on for some time since Regan ran. Elements of the RNC did not want to allow another Regan to emerge to win the nomination. So they at first just moved in the primary dates here and there. Now, this move is to guarantee that only the well financed and backed will have a chance. It is all about leaving true conservatives out. This is an attempt to limit our choices. Period.

[penowa]

Yes, the coming primaries are being rigged so that the only candidates who can survive are those endorsed by Soros and the elites. Not that it will make any difference, but once this has happened, I will be waving bye-bye to the Republican party and I have a feeling it will be a very brief interval before the Republican party morphs into the Whigs and vanishes from the scene for good.