Dixie rising How the Deep South is trying to game the GOP primary.

Politico ^ | December 22, 2014 | James Hohmann

[Mozilla]

The Deep South has elected Republicans to every top office in the region. Now it wants to be sure that clout extends to the choice of the GOP’s 2016 presidential nominee.

Officials in five Southern states — Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas — are coordinating to hold their primary on March 1, 2016. Texas and Florida are considering also holding a primary the same day but may wait until later in the month. Either way, March 1 would be a Southern Super Tuesday, voting en masse on the heels of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

The joint primary, which appears increasingly likely to happen, would present a crucial early test for Republican White House hopefuls among the party’s most conservative voters. It could, in theory, boost a conservative alternative to a Republican who has emerged as the establishment favorite from the four states that kick off the nominating process. But one risk is that the deep-red complexion of the Southern states’ primary electorates would empower a candidate who can’t win in general election battlegrounds like Ohio and Colorado.

Republicans from the South say their states make up the heart of the GOP and that it’s only fitting the region should have commensurate say over whom the party puts forward to compete for the White House. Proponents are already dubbing March 1 the “SEC primary,” after the NCAA’s powerhouse Southeastern Conference.

[Mozilla]

I personally liked this title from Townhall: Southern Regional Presidential Primary Heading Toward Reality.

But the article was very hard to paraphrase because it did not shoot straight. Went into a much longer complicated wordy explanation of how the states ended up combining for a March 1st primary date. Todd Rehm did a good job but it was too much to just find a good portion to snip.

So I went to Hot Air which came up in a Bing search. But the title was way too wordy. The South wants its status as GOP’s geographic heartland reflected in presidential primaries. Fine but it was just too long for my liking.

Noah Rothman then became too wonky and wordy like Townhall's piece. Went into mary Landrieu's loss in Louisiana Starts out saying the South shifted in 60 years from Being reliably Democrat to reliably Republican and that now the transition is complete.

In the end it paraphrased itself from the Politco. So I just went there from their hotlink. But Politico's headline title is pure BS to me. But I must follow the rules so I have to use the crappier title, but it paraphrased the bottom line much easier than the other two sites which give long ass explanations.

The Townhall article: http://townhall.com/columnists/toddrehm/2014/12/21/southern-regional-presidential-primary-heading-toward-reality-n1934058

The Hot Air article:http://hotair.com/archives/2014/12/22/the-south-wants-its-status-as-gops-geographic-heartland-reflected-in-presidential-primaries/

[GeronL]

“game it” is a loaded term

Why shouldn’t more conservative states have early primaries, the system needs to be un-gamed IMO

[a fool in paradise]

Those who elected Republican majorities should have the say of the party nominee over inconsequential Nor’eastern states in primary.

[Tanniker Smith]

I have no problem with that characterization, if only because I think every state has been trying to do that in some way or another to score points, or just to matter. I hate the whole primary system. Almost makes you long for the back-room negotiation days from when the convention might have actually been important. (”Might have” b/c despite my age, I don’t remember a time when they were actually important.)

[Salvey]

...empower a candidate who can’t win in general election battlegrounds

It all depends on how a conservative candidate presents himself to those electorates. A conservative with a friendly mien (think Reagan) can likely prevail in battleground states.

[Finny]

The bottom line is, I think, already settled. The GOP primaries will likely select a functional Democrat nominee, though if there's a miracle, a true alternative limited government Christian conservative like Cruz or Palin will get the Republican nomination. In a perfect world, yeah.

The world right now is a place where voters who intend to turn things right, act to turn things left, at least in the Republican party. More and more voters are waking up to that truth. It's just a reality.

There are self-proclaimed "anti democrats" on FR who advocate voting for the Republican at any cost, that any Republican is better than a Democrat.

But they are at least equaled, if not outnumbered, by people who get that they have to own what they vote for. Republicans who are comfortable with a party-official more "conservative" version of nationalized health care, homosexual "rights," on-demand abortion, environmentalist control of food and energy production and consumption, fine -- vote for it! That is what Romney promised for the Republican party and many Republicans seek that very thing. GREAT! Go vote for it.

The problem is that many have convinced themselves that they aren't voting for that, they're voting "against" the Democrat.

It appears that they are in the minority. Romney lost, after all. Thank goodness.

[MrB]

That’s exactly it - the more liberal states moved their primaries early, and the citizens of other states are basically disenfranchised because of it.

[Sergio]

It’s ironic that it is the South that once again is fighting to remove the federal boot from the state’s neck.

I often hear, “The south will rise again”. It can’t happen fast enough.

[relictele]

Quite. I’m sick of gullible Iowa and NH yokels foisting loser RINOs on us.

[lonevoice]

Officials in five Southern states — Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas — are coordinating to hold their primary on March 1, 2016

Hmmm...all states that Mike Huckabee won in the 2008 primaries. :-\

[Sherman Logan]

Primary season should be shortened. Dates should be distributed evenly over the period, with specific states randomly assigned their dates by draw two years prior.

This idiocy of giving the same “early primary” states enormous influence on who the candidates will be every year needs to stop.

It plays, for example a big role in corporate welfare for farmers and ethanol producers. Iowa.

[Pollster1]

If the deep South can nominate a conservative Texan, such as Cruz, I’m okay with this. If they manage to draft a former Alaskan Governor, I’m okay with that too. If they go with a RINO (Christie, the next Bush in line, Rubio, Romney, etc) then I guess we’ll end up with Hillary or Warren, whichever special minority the Democrats choose to exploit for 2016.

[Mozilla]

The Politico chose fighting words. They hate the fact the south and conservatives will have more say. They think that is a losing formula, but yet The last two presidential elections the GOP had very bad rino moderate leftists nominees who did not win for the Republicans. I think The Politico is highly unhappy a conservative will get momentum.

[GeronL]

bump

[taxcontrol]

I am of the opinion that the GOP should hold all primaries at the same time on April 16th.

[Mozilla]

True. The GOP-E has settled on Jeb or Christie. They will be pushing hard for them. They will start attacking other candidates, namely conservatives.

The situation right now is with these leftist Republicans agreeing too much with the Democrats and having the same goals, the people have nowhere to turn to find a real alternative to Obama and the radical left. The tea party is trying their hardest, but its not enough as 2014 saw.

There were fakes in the group of people the tea party elected in 2010 like Marco Rubio, Kelly Ayotte, Rand Paul and also it was a mistake for conservatives to have backed Jeff Flake and Mitch McConnell, but many did anyways.

[Mozilla]

Good idea but Iowa and New Hampshire would never agree to it. They conned the system for rinos to win.

[Mozilla]

The way the system is set up the Candidates mostly spend a year kissing New Hampshire and Iowa’s butt then forgot the other states until late in the process. Pundits live off focusing only on those two states as well as they think what they want is symbolic of the country and it is normally not the case. They want then the people who didn’t do too well to quickly drop out and don’t give them a chance.

[Monorprise]

The South is rising again. :)

[Finny]

Maybe we Americans who want government off our backs don't so much need a party as we need a leader, and let Republicans scramble to get on board when that leader establishes a following of people who, essentially, want to cut back excess government and restore personal freedoms and responsibilities. Government excess pushes people toward amorality, so social conservatives should be totally on board. The State usurpation of the moral duty of charity, for example, has turned it into an entitlement. When extended out of morality, charity demands voluntary sacrifice and places the debt of gratitude to receivers. When the State overtakes it and turns it into forced welfare and "humane, compassionate" government support, charity loses its moral value and becomes an entitlement. Evil results.

Sorry ... off on a tangent, but really, lack of party is the problem, but it needs a leader of people to be solved. I am fully prepared for a dynamic exciting third-party candidacy in the 2016 presidential. If one doesn't materialize if the GOP nominates a functional-Democrat Republican ... then all bets are off. That would be very bad because a mandate win for either party would be bad for the country.