• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Iowa go first?

Should Iowa vote before all other states in presidential primary elections?

  • Total voters
    13
Cephus said:
It really doesn't matter, those candidates are still never going to get the party nomination and never make it to the general election.
Click to expand...

That is because most of the time they lack the funds to make it to all those other times by the time the primary hits those states. That is the only reason for staggering the primaries.The primaries should be on the same day all across the country so that everyone has a chance to vote for their candidate.
 
jamesrage said:
That is because most of the time they lack the funds to make it to all those other times by the time the primary hits those states. That is the only reason for staggering the primaries.The primaries should be on the same day all across the country so that everyone has a chance to vote for their candidate.
Click to expand...

None of which stops all of the poor performing candidates from dropping out of the race because they just don't have what it takes to get the nomination. There are plenty of people in the GOP clown car right now that will be dropping out of the race very soon, it wouldn't matter if the primaries were all on the same day or not. They just don't have the popular support necessary and they aren't going to get the popular support out of the blue.
 
jamesrage said:
That is because most of the time they lack the funds to make it to all those other times by the time the primary hits those states. That is the only reason for staggering the primaries.The primaries should be on the same day all across the country so that everyone has a chance to vote for their candidate.
Click to expand...
If you have them all the same day you'll pretty much guarantee that you'll only get big-money candidates. Something tells me you wouldn't like that. Be careful what you wish for.
 
Some state has to go first, unless we want to mandate every state do it the same day.

I don't really see what it matters.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Personally I think the first state to go should be the state that most demographically matches the country as a whole. A state like North Carolina or Pennsylvania probably comes closer to fitting the bill in that regard.
Click to expand...

Honestly they should do it regionally. They break it up so that the candidates can make appearances, speeches and campaign in an area to be heard. You could do a block of like NY up through Maine all on one day. the west coast all on one day, Texas and the heartland states on one day, the Mountain west on one day, the south east on one day, the great lakes central region on one day etc..
 
The SwampDonkey said:
From "myelectionhelper.com"



"The Iowa Caucus is the first nominating contest in the country because their law says so. In fact, Iowa law requires the caucus to be held at least 8 days before any other caucus or primary and no later than the fourth Monday of February. New Hampshire has a similar law which has led to them holding the nation’s first primary since 1920.

Ultimately, Iowa and New Hampshire get to go first because the parties and other states generally let them go first. Because of their small sizes, they have historically allowed candidates to get face-to-face with a number of people, shaking hands rather than raising funds. This intimate “retail” politicking allows not just residents of Iowa and New Hampshire, but also residents of the other 48 states watching through the media, to see how the candidates act."
Click to expand...

I can't say much about Iowa but I've lived in NH for almost 20 years and have seen how the primary process works here. Our state is small enough in size and population that the candidates are able to broadly reach a lot of people in different "pockets" of voting types. Like the nation itself, we have heavily partisan areas (far left, far right), we have a massive number of independents, we border 3 other states and have easy access to another 3 or 4 states. We have rural areas and urban areas. We have high wealth towns and dirt poor towns. We are the "Live Free or Die" state and we tend to be anti-government overreach. It's a very good test for the rest of the country. It also enables those of you who are NOT here to see and learn about the candidates. It's quite easy these days to download their speeches, see what they say, listen to their points, and so on.

They have neither the money nor the capacity to run as a candidate in all 50 states if we had a primary "day" in this country. It would be far less effective than the way it's run today. It's a test run. Nothing wrong with it, and the candidates who will drop out after our primary in 2 weeks had no chance at a national run anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom