MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

RH Oregon — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:56:42 GMT

Or maybe it's just another smokescreen to mask the sinking of the 'USS Hillery'. The ship was last seen wallowing in deep water after striking a obstacle in the China Sea.

We need a one day primary system. Or a week long (max) regional primary on a rotation.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

GC, Manchester, NH — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:58:45 GMT

Does anyone know why Carl Levin HATES New Hampshire so much? His feud with all things NH has been going on for many years now and literally resulted in the DNC committee that in-turn created the 4 state window. It borders on the personal and makes me wonder if there's something going unreported here.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

jerry/corpus christi texas — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:03:10 GMT

Hillary has pretty much sank herself, with all the criminals she associates with here lately.

A democrat governor taking on the democratic party? Priceless!

This shows you how much the democratic party has been hijacked by the far left morons.

You guys have all the chances in the world to take down my party. It will be your morons on the left that will seal your fate!

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:12:06 GMT

RH, It's Hillary. Please learn how to spell. Your hatred has struck you dumb.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Praise be to Allah, leftists, and other anarchists — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:14:32 GMT

And our democrap controlled Congress keeps rolling on with rational, balanced, and reasonable legislation guaranteed NOT to protect, defend, and nourish our Nation. Thank you Harriest Reid and Nancy P-whotevah.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

matthew, morriston, fl — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:16:24 GMT

Why? Well, just because!!!

This entrie thing is ridiculous. Because of the mess, I will not be able to cast a vote that matters in my FLA primary. Talk about a lawsuit...

http://political-buzz.com/

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

jerry/corpus christi texas — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:18:58 GMT

Michigan could invade New Hampshire, but after that whipping they took from Appalachian state........

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Already sick of it... — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:27:48 GMT

Wouldn't it be interesting if, besides Florida and Michigan, many other states including large ones such as New York and Texas decided to move their primaries ahead of New Hampshire and Iowa? I wonder how sold the DNC would be on denying ALL of those states' delegates the right to vote in the convention? And what would happen if they did.

Anyway, I'm with RH in calling for a national primary--and I'll add to that that those expensive, several-day-long conventions should be scrapped and replaced by brief ceremonies in which each party's nominee accepts nomination, then announces his/her choice of a running mate.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:29:00 GMT

As we know, whoever wins the first primary states has a major lead on the primary decision. Why should New Hampshire and Iowa be the ones to decide who the primary candidate is? So we really think that two small agricultural states are representative of the entire nation? Don't the small population states already have enough of an advantage due to the fact that they have much more representation per capita?

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

RH Oregon — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:29:32 GMT

Hillery, Hillary, Hillarity, HillBilly, whatever!
It ain't hatred because hatred takes too much. I would not waste my time hating her. Write it off to pure disgust at the mention of either Clinton. Pure socialist scum.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country owes you, for nothing...

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Sierra, SF — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:31:42 GMT

I think Jennifer Granholm is a VERY UNPOPULAR govenor.
She has to pull a stunt to get some 'non-negative' publicity (at least non-negative in Michigan)

Follow the rules, Michigan !!
Follow the rules, Florida !!

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

tuck,btown, kansas — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:37:13 GMT

it's so cute, the baby repubies having a meltdown because a woman will soon be leading this country,,,, not they didn't mind when nancy took over for ronnie.

remember,it's OBAMA with the MOB TIES

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Dave, Tn — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:41:16 GMT

They keep this up, and they won't have to hire blackwater for security. No one will be there except the wing nut losers who want to "recreate 68". Hope the networks still show up. Really looking forward to seeing that circus on TV.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

jerry/corpus christi texas — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:50:11 GMT

Tuck---and Hillary with the Chinese

Sounds like Michigan is leaning to be a red state.

If Hillary is such a strong woman, why does Bill need to be there then? To keep her from falling down when she steps init?

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Molly Ringster, Burlington VT — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:51:32 GMT

GC: "Does anyone know why Carl Levin HATES New Hampshire so much? "

It's not just him, it's pretty much everyone. What did you guys do to p*ss everyone off?

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Your DNC — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:56:18 GMT

Join the Slave Nation. Vote Democrat in 08!!! Become a "special person" with "special rights" just sign over your self respect.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Windy City Girl, Chicago IL — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:07:47 GMT

Obama doesn't have mob ties (Rezko is not a mobster, he is a crappy person alright, but Joey Lombardo and Tony Rezko are not one and the same) and Hillary is not behind the primary push.

All that talk is just stupid!

I think having the state primaries on ONE DAY just like our regular Voting Day would solve a lot of problems. Starting with the fact that the people of Iowa and the people of New Hampshire get all of their questions answered by the politicians and it is fairly easy to meet whoever might be your new president in those states, while the rest of us just have to guess what they are like. That sucks.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

GAB, AUstin, TX — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:14:54 GMT

Pure socialist scum? So glad you are going to give back your Social Security RH.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

jerry/corpus christi texas — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:16:34 GMT

Well, after all Molly, what is there in Vermont? Aside from a beautiful view in the fall, Maple Syrup for my pancakes and Howard Dean destroying the Democratic party, not much going on there.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:17:52 GMT

Josh - Why should the big states get to decide everything? And an FYI - one of the reasons Iowa is the first caucus is because the people who go to caucus (surprise!) actually know the issues, the candidates, etc.

And as far as "punishing" NH for changing its date - um, yeah...that's a pretty lame argument, for lack of a better word. NH is moving because other states are moving...and that will probably be the case with Iowa as well, although it appears that we are waiting until the dust settles before we pick another date. That's a far cry from moving because you are greedy.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Windy City Girl, Chicago IL — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:19:29 GMT

Hey,

Other dems notice the same old republicans responding to these dem blogs over and over again?

I guess we would do the same if anyone even cared enough about the republicans to cause any interest.

But, you think they wouldn't have time to bother with these blogs with all of their toe-tapping, child preying, hooker hooking upping, gay hooker hooking upping, gay hooker hooking upping for mething, gay bashing, foreign racial slur learning, ghost attacking, indian robbing and indian giving, slandering, phone line jamming, intelligence report ignoring, and America raping they have to do!

With people like Craig, Vitter, Rove, Libby, Cheney, Haggard (maybe not a politician but with as much power as on), Allen, Abramhoff and everyone connected (hmmm I can remember Ney for sure without having to look him up, Foley and Bush, the Democrats really don't need to worry about winning the general election, just our regular primary jousting.

What is funny to me is that you still think that those are the people who can be trusted to protect you and tell you the truth. Boy, you must have been born yesterday!

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

GC, Manchester, NH — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:19:50 GMT

NH is NOT an agricultural state - we're one of the most prosperous and highly educated states per capita. If you mentioned "ethanol" here, most people would ask you to speak English.

If FL, MI and especially NY, CA and TX took over the early stages of the nominating process, the field is automatically narrowed and the richest candidate is guranteed to win. We'd probably have another 20 years of Bushes and Clintons in the White House.

Blame Carl Levin for this mess - he opened the floodgates and once he didn't like the direction the tides were turning, he spat in the DNC's face.

Levin - tell your state it focus on what it's good at: making inferior cars and losing big football games.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Charlie, Il — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:29:58 GMT

Tuck, be careful people who live in glass houses can't through stones.

Obama may know them, but he gave their money back. Several months ago rezio's friends in Chicago had a fundraiser for Clinton. She said she was not going to give the money back. This fundraiser was after the news about rezio came out.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Joe Williams — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:30:35 GMT

Doesn't anyone realize that both political parties are playing games to prevent you from having real choice. I say vote'em ALL out.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Williams, NYC — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:42:48 GMT

Hillary's campaign has been pushing early primaries. It's less time for the media to continue duping voters with her say nothing fluff.
Even Clinton's Treas. Sec on ABC's This Week said John Edwards has the most substance - and Hillary and Obama need to get some meat.
But why should they propose anything but fluff when the corporate media promotes them BECAUSE of their fluff.

John Edwards will be a great President!

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Richard, LA — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:47:25 GMT

If Hillary is such a strong woman - why did the Clinton's sell their souls to Rupert Murdoch and Fox News?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0707/Defending_Hillary_from_the_left.html

The corporate media concealing current info about the Clintons - and making up crap about John Edwards - is the only way Hillary could win.
Makes me wonder what the Clintons and Murdoch would be concealing if Hillary were prez.

Rupert Murdoch also bought Tony Blair - but don't look for that in our corporate media.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/57376

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:46:24 GMT

Carrie,

The Big States do not get to decide everything. That's why you, as a small stater, have twice as much representation in congress, and in the electoral college, than I do as a New Yorker.
Is it really fair to pile the primary selection on top of that?
Besides, my suggestion would be to have a random selection as to who goes first in the primaries each time. It's only fair.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:50:00 GMT

GC,
Perhaps not in Manchester, but I go to NH on a bi-annual basis, and it seems pretty agricultural to me.
Be that as it may, my point still stands. It is completely unfair that the same states get to pick our nominees each year.
Imagine if New York and California were first? How would you feel then?

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Nick Dorsey — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:52:00 GMT

Sorry to actually stick to the topic of why not punish N Hampshire also?

New Hampshire hasn't actually moved to protect its first place in time primary and besides is one of only 4 states that actually had permission to have their primary before 2/5/08. Michigan did not.

That's why! Not a bad red herring, but smells fishy neverthless.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Sierra, SF — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:52:02 GMT

Joe Williams :
'Doesn't anyone realize that both political parties are playing games to prevent you from having real choice. I say vote'em ALL out.'

Joe Williams: EXACTLY !!
THROW THE BUMS OUT !!
DON'T BRING THE BUMS BACK !!

Hillary Clinton, the Omen, Part IV

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

RH Oregon — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:52:54 GMT

Pure socialist scum? So glad you are going to give back your Social Security RH.
GAB, AUstin, TX (Sent Tuesday, September 04, 2007 2:14 PM)

My social security?? What security? It's gone. Guess who I blame?

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent “Trust” fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the “tie-breaking” deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That’s right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!
http://www.savessi.com

Yup, "socialist scum", call 'em like I see 'em. You don't have to agree.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Pete Caloger Bushkill, PA 18324 — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:58:22 GMT

I live in a large state and I guess I could argue that as a result of that fact, PA should be one of the first primaries. Hogwash. The beauty of the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries is that the states are small enought to give their voters an opportunity to really meet the candidates and hear what they have to say, and it also gives us an opportunity to watch this interaction and better understand who the candidates are. All we big-staters have to do is pay attention.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:03:10 GMT

Josh - How do you figure that Iowa has twice as much representation in Congress than does NY? You are aware that the House of Representatives is apportioned by population, right? Iowa has 5 seats in the House, based on our population of 2,982,085 as of the 2000 census. NY has 29 seats in the House, based on its population of 19,306,183. Without doing any math, I'm not sure where you get the idea that we have twice as much representation. Obviously we do not. Of the 435 seats, we hold 5 and NY holds 29.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

American voter — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:24:05 GMT

RH, O; Do you ever fact check?

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Ralph Mexico, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:29:52 GMT

Okay, here are a couple of things no one seems to want to think about when it comes to the primary process:

First, the rationale behind the “process” is to nominate a candidate who can win in a general election. Since election depends on the Electoral College then it is important to vet candidates in both large and small states. Iowa and New Hampshire have demographics that make them good test samples for the general election and that are the only reason professional politicians fight to keep them first.

Second, the purpose of the process is to act as a winnowing blade, getting the large group or pretenders down to a small group of contenders. Ideally these two states which are by size and political temperament assessable to politicians of modest means might breathe life into an underdog like Mike Huckabee or Bill Richardson and carve off others with greater resources. To expose the whole bunch to a large state like Florida or Michigan would seem to exclude all but those who have the most resources from the start.

I question the wisdom of having an accelerated process. I’m not sure John Kerry in 04 or George Bush in 00 would have been the nominee if the respective parties were not so interested “saving” the candidates for the general election.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

sonya, atlanta,ga — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:08:24 GMT

the rouge states should settle down. If they wanted to move their primaries up they should have contacted the dnc last year about doing it. The bunched up primaries only benefit the front runners, plus the bigger states will only get more tv ads not face to face time with the candidates- too much ground to cover.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Mark, Gilford New Hampshire — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:13:25 GMT

I would like to know how many of you in Michigan (I grew up there and left to LIVE in NH) have seen any of the candidates, other than on TV? We have been to see McCain, Hillary and Edwards and will see Obama this Sunday. We have never been so involved in the political process and living in NH makes it easy. Live Free or Die. Michigan is just too large to effectively campaign in person. Do you really believe everything you see on a TV commercial!

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Dave, Tn — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:13:29 GMT

Hey Windy City Girl. Check out the stats from the last DOJ report on crime. Using your lame azz liberal logic one could say democrats commit the majority of murders in the US. Put down that broad brush you're trying to paint others with.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:26:48 GMT

Mark - I hear that, and it is the same way in Iowa. There is rarely a day that goes by that one of the candidates isn't here. We meet them, we question them, and we get a real feel for who they are and what they want to do as president. And that feel does not come courtesy of expensive TV ads.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:35:34 GMT

Carrie, you said:
>How do you figure that Iowa has twice as much representation in Congress than does NY? <

Iowa, as a state, does not have twice as much representation as New York. However, Iowans, as individuals, do.

You forgot your two senators in your math.
Using your own figures, plus senators... Rounding off:

3 million divided by 7 = 1 per approx. 400,000
20 million divided by 31 = 1 per approx. 650,000

So, maybe in Iowa's case, 2 to 1 was a bit of an overestimation, but your individual voting power is definitely much more than ours.

And the smaller the state gets, the more voting power per indiviual it has, so:

New Hampshire: 1.3 million divided by 4 = 1 per 325,000

Which is just about exacly twice as much representation, per person, as New York.

These figures hold true for the Electoral College also, as the EC numbers are based on both House and Senate numbers.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Mark, Gilford New Hampshire — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:38:20 GMT

Since we have been to the events - it is interesting that Edwards and McCain took questions from the crowd - Hillary did not! As a matter of fact, she promised that before she was sworn in, she would "travel the world" to better our standing in the world (didn't she criticize Obama for the same statement) and she also "borrowed" another key platform from Edwards. She seems to take things said by others and make them her own. But she could not be challenged on her statements because she did not give the opportunity. She has not earned my vote.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:46:44 GMT

>Iowa and New Hampshire have demographics that make them good test samples<

I disagree with that. There are no real major urban areas in either state. If they threw in, say Pennsylvania or Louisiana, then it might make sense.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:47:35 GMT

>If they wanted to move their primaries up they should have contacted the dnc last year about doing it.<

They DID contact the DNC last year. The DNC refused them.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

CitizenJ — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:02:43 GMT

Josh,

The reason every state has 2 Senators is so that every state would have equal representation in Congress, no matter the population. It was by design, per the Connecticut Compromise. Representation in the House is based on population, but when it comes down to votes, New York has 29 and Iowa has 5. That doesn't really provide for completely equal representation. In the Senate, every state has 2. That is where the equality comes in.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:29:47 GMT

CitizenJ,

I know why it was instituted, but that was 250 years ago, when the country was a mainly rural nation and the differences in population weren't so dramatic.

On the Republican side, look at Hunter, who just won the straw poll in Texas, but it's probable that he'll never make it there, if he loses a few small states first.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 23:50:18 GMT

Josh - The reasons stand true today as much as they did then. If there was not a Senate with equal representation, small states would get rolled over by larger ones. Hardly a fair system, if you ask me. But I don't expect you to understand that, being from a big state yourself.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Molly Ringster, Burlington VT — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:51:10 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas: Well, after all Molly, what is there in Vermont? Aside from a beautiful view in the fall, Maple Syrup for my pancakes and Howard Dean destroying the Democratic party, not much going on there.

Colder then a witches mammary gland around here too.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Monte Hall — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:55:04 GMT

>Iowa and New Hampshire have demographics that make them good test samples<

FACT!! Most people in the US are pig farmers and suck syrup out of the trees.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:06:12 GMT

Colder then a witches mammary gland around here too.

Molly, Hillary Clinton should feel right at home then.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:27:36 GMT

Monte - I don't know any pig farmers. I do know a lot of judges, attorneys, local politicians, professors, students (graduate and undergraduate), secretaries, health care professionals, bank executives, truck drivers, custodians, factory workers, fast food workers, and various other people. They all live and work in Iowa. Funny, sounds kind of like a pretty representative sample if you ask me.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Edna, St. Petersburg, Florida — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:48:57 GMT

How DARE the DNC selectively enforce the primary-date setting rules by disenfranchising millions of innocent voters in Florida and Michigan while doing NOTHING about NH? As a lifelong, loyal, passionate, VOTING Democrat and a Florida voter, I was already outraged at the DNC over this issue before I learned today that New Hampshire violated the rule first and started this whole thing, and the DNC has said nothing! They are not taking their delegates away! It already struck me as mightily unfair to penalize and disenfranchise voters for something out of our control that the Republican legislature of Florida did. But now to find out, oh, by the way, NH violated the primary date rule, too, but the DNC is doing nothing about that? To me that says one thing and one thing clearly: The Democratic parties of Florida and Michigan should SUE the DNC for selectively enforcing their rule and for disenfranchising millions of voters. PERIOD!!!!!!!!!! Meanwhile, us voters need to turn out en masse and vote ANYWAY, to send a message that we will NOT be disenfranchised and we are a large, powerful, passionate base of voters from two important, huge states. Get a clue, DNC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Edna, St. Petersburg, Florida — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:55:35 GMT

P.S. Let me be sure to add that I have nothing against NH being first, nor do I advocate going to a national primary. A national primary would probably end up focusing just on big media markets and issues not of importance to same would be lost in the shuffle. However, obviously the present primary system needs tweaking, at a minimum, out probably overhauling. What about some sort of regional primary system? Anyway, just wanted to add that I have nothing against NH and I don't want to see the DNC strip them of their delegates because they violated the rule (not that that would happen), I was just pointing out that selective enforcement of the rules is unfair and no doubt illegal, so I think that Florida and Michigan should definitely use that point in a lawsuit to get the DNC to reinstate the delegates. Selective enforcement of the rules won't hold up in court. Besides, punishing millions of registered voters doesn't do a thing towards fixing the primary system.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 18:03:43 GMT

Carrie,

Small states pay less taxes then large states and receive more federal funding, all due to their over-representation.

This country was founded on the premise of equal representation in proportion with taxation.

Thus the current system is, by definition, un-American.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Monte Hall — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 18:34:59 GMT

Carrie - Monte - I don't know any pig farmers. I do know a lot of judges, attorneys, local politicians, professors, students (graduate and undergraduate), secretaries, health care professionals, bank executives, truck drivers, custodians, factory workers, fast food workers, and various other people. They all live and work in Iowa.

Looks like a lot of white people there too. 96% of them by the looks of things.

Carrie - Funny, sounds kind of like a pretty representative sample if you ask me.

Sounds more like utopia for the Aryan Nation.

Hey, while we're at it, lets check out the representative sample of New Hampshire. My, my. 97% white.

Guess we don't want any of them there my-norities having first crack at selecting the prez.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Stu Freiking, Nashville TN — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 19:48:25 GMT

This is actually quite interesting. Al Gore's internet shows that Iowa has 3 million people and 15 million pigs. Figure 1 million people that are doctors, lawyers, etc., i.e., people that support the pig farmers. That gives you 2 million people to take care of 15 million pigs, or about 7.5 pigs for every pig farmer.

It's not clear what percentage of the pigs are white.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Sara, Cedar Rapids, Iowa — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 20:05:29 GMT

Monte Hall

I don't think your stat.'s on Iowa are correct, although it is over 90% white, but not as high as 96%. If Iowa was as racist as you seem to think, why has Obama drawn larger crowds in the state than any political candidate, or any sitting President has drawn? It must be all those Illinois college students that come to Iowa to attend our state and private colleges at his rallies. It is true that most of Obama's campaign volunteers are white, and interestingly Clinton has a fair number of African American supporters, but I see that as a sign that Iowans are supporting candidate they like the best, not merely who looks most like them. While the polls in Iowa are meaningless regarding caucus preference, because they start with an inappropriate sample, they are a reflection of name ID among Iowa democrats, and if Iowa was filled with racists Obama would not be polling substantially better in Iowa than he is nationally.

I don't believe anyone has claimed that Iowa is representative of the nation as a whole, whether it be on race or national origin. We actually do mirror the country fairly well on religion. In my home town there is a large Lebanese community, half of which are Islamic, the other half is Orthodox Christian. The oldest mosque west of the Mississippi is in my home town. There is a small town in Iowa (Postville) with a very large European immigrant population, who are Hasidic Jews. (an old packing plant was purchased and turned into a kosher processing plant)The town's signs are in English and in Hebrew. The last good GOP governor of Iowa, Bob Ray, was instrumental in bringing large groups of Cambodian, Laotion (sp) and Viet Nam refugees to Iowa in the 1970's. As a percent of population I'm sure very few states have a larger Cambodian/Viet Nam population. Educationally Iowa and Minnesota usually trade off with respect to test scores.

However whether Iowa is heaven (i.e. the line from "Field of Dreams") an ungodly hole or somewhere in between is interesting (actually not really), but it is not relevant. Iowa and NH are traditionally first not because they are mirrors of the country, but because it allows for the possibility that the best candidate, as opposed to the best funded candidate can break through and have a chance at their parties nomination. If you watch the debates on both sides you will see the GOP candidate who has done the best (from a GOP point of view) has been Mike Huckabee. Will he be the nominee, probably not, but the process of having NH, and IA (and now So. Carolina and NV for geographical diversity, and race diversity added this election cycle) gives him the opportunity to break through. If the large states were able to push their way through, or we had regional primaries the only Democratic candidates with any chance would be Clinton, Edwards, and Obama. A candidate who couldn't raise at least 50 million couldn't even attempt to break through, and the country would be lesser as a result. Because the media only gives coverage to their perceived inevitable candidate, the present system is the only way a candidate superior to the candidate with the deepest pockets, or the media's perceived favorite is if the first couple contest are in states that not only will require the candidates to answer questions directly to the voters (as opposed to in debates where they are allowed to BS and not actually respond to the question, and large rally where they give their stump speech but never respond to questions from real people)

What I don't understand is the argument that Iowa and NH decides the race. We go first, most of those in Iowa who attend the caucus (a real pain in the butt time consuming process) don't just go in a support a candidate without a lot of consideration and reflection. Who ever wins Iowa, or comes in a surprising second etc. gets a bump, that's what Iowa does. If they go on to win NH which doesn't always happen (It did in 04 & 00 but didn't in 92 or 88)they will have an even bigger bump, but between the two states we have 11 electoral votes (IA 7 NH 4). The race is not determined after IA and NH, if we determine the race, it is either because voters in subsequent states decide we did a good job measuring up the candidates, the candidates we rejected started to show flaws we knew they had (ie Dean's yell after his 18% low 3rd place showing), or voters in other states don't care to independently evaluate the candidates, and simply go with who ever who Iowa or NH. We don't decide the election, each voter in every other state is free to do their own research (which with the internet and you tube is far easier than in the past when to find out voting records you had to spend hour at the library searching back issues of the congressional quarterly, and never saw candidates speeches unless they were televised), or voters can rely on Iowa and NH. The bottom line is voters in Iowa and NH have taken this responsibility seriously, and I'm sure if Minnesota and West Va, or any other combination of states that would not be cost prohibitive (both due to size, and cost of the media market)were first their citizen's would also take the opportunity to scrutinize the candidates, and see which ones are full of it, crazy (think some on the GOP this year)or acceptable, and whoever won those states would get a bump. And the large states that follow (hopefully in Feb per the calendar!) can decide however they want.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:07:04 GMT

Monte - As I said to some equally ignorant person, race aside, when you look at the 2000 Census and compare Iowa with the US the numbers line up pretty well. Yes, we are predominantly white as a whole; there are, however, quite a few areas where there are a lot of minorities. I happen to have spent all but one year of my life in those areas, so I will thank you to keep your innuendos of bigotry to yourself.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:15:53 GMT

Sara summed it up very nicely. As has often been said, people who choose to caucus in Iowa don't do so on a whim. They study the issues, the candidates, the positions, the election as a whole. They are prepared to make a decision based on the facts and their own personal belief system - not on a 30-second TV ad. You don't just check off a box and be done with it.

I grew up on Iowa City, which is home to the University of Iowa. We did not lack for diversity, whether it be racial, ethnic, religious or whatever other category you can come up with. I also spent some time in NW Iowa, where there is a considerable chunk of the population from the Pacific island region. There are pockets that are very homogenous, but there are also many portions of the state that are diverse, albeit probably not as diverse as the big city.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Monte Hall — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:30:12 GMT

Sara - "I don't think your stat.'s on Iowa are correct, although it is over 90% white, but not as high as 96%. If Iowa was as racist as you seem to think, why has Obama drawn larger crowds in the state than any political candidate, or any sitting President has drawn?"

The numbers are correct. 96% white. No one is saying Iowa is racist. A comparison was made that a white supremest would be comfortable in such a white state - an attempt at humor which seems to have not connected.

Sara - "I don't believe anyone has claimed that Iowa is representative of the nation as a whole, whether it be on race or national origin."

Carrie did. The quote is as follows: "Monte - I don't know any pig farmers. I do know a lot of judges, attorneys, local politicians, professors, students (graduate and undergraduate), secretaries, health care professionals, bank executives, truck drivers, custodians, factory workers, fast food workers, and various other people. They all live and work in Iowa. Funny, sounds kind of like a pretty representative sample if you ask me."

In fact, Iowa is not a representative sample.

Sara - "However whether Iowa is heaven (i.e. the line from "Field of Dreams")"
<rest of Chamber of Commerce advertising deleted>

Sara and Carrie, I'm sure you are both proud of your state. It is a fine state, but does not even come close to representing the country as a whole. It is nearly all white, and it has little industry. It does seem to have a sense of entitlement for being the first state to cast ballots for presidential candidates. It that sense, it's known for setting the tone for who becomes the next President. If that isn't true, then why all the fuss on being first? But, all things come to an end, and Iowa is a prime example of an anachronism. It really is time to move Iowa out of the spotlight for the primaries.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Monte Hall — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 22:23:46 GMT

Iowa. 96% white.

Aren't the Democrats always harping about diversity?

Sara, Carrie - got to give you your due. You two are two of the best "hand-wavers" I've ever had the pleasure to read. You two could sell refrigerators to Eskimos, if there were any Eskimos in Iowa.

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

Josh, Brooklyn, NY — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 23:32:52 GMT

Stu Freiking - That was incredibly funny.

By the way, did anyone notice that the people defending the status quo are all from Iowa or New Hampshire?

Everyone else seems to see the complete unfairness of these two states always getting to choose the nominee.

On the other hand, if I move 100,000 new yorkers and californians to Iowa, it would change the face of the next election...

Has anyone looked at the last few censuses and noticed how fast the population of Iowa has expanded in the last decade or so?

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

jarratt W. Martin, kalamazoo, Michigan — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:43:27 GMT

I can understand the Democratic Party -- my party --
saying: For XYZ considerations, OK, states, this is the date we start having primaries. BUT to say that
state NH and IA have an inalienable right to start first -- what? Does that make sense? Is there something else afoot here? Hm. perhpaps, a little paranoia on my part. Both Fl and MI are states for
wonderful Hill. Hmm. Who runs the Democratic National Committee? Who casts the vote? Jerry/Kalamazoo, Michigan, a Dem.
my part

MI Dems: Why not punish NH, too?

George Anketell, Manchester, NH — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 15:55:57 GMT

I think to be fair all primarys, should be held on the same day, the same as final election is held in one day. That way everyone would have a chance to see,hear and be heard.