Reply #2: This is good and bad... [View All]

[IrateCitizen]

Personally, I think that we should have a more diverse and populous state as the first one in the primary process. But I think that putting several big states together would be a disaster, because it would promote candidates who have a bigger war chest over those who might be able to establish broader grassroots support over time.

The idea behind the primary process is supposed to be momentum. Candidates who do well early on generate the momentum needed to raise funds and build larger support networks, while those who don't do as well fade away.

Prior to 1988, the primary season was much longer and more spread-out. This gave candidates the opportunity to focus on each state as it came around. Then, at the urging of the ascendant DLC, "Super Tuesday" was created in order to increase the impact of southern states and to make early fundraising a bigger priority in the process.

Personally, I don't think the early primary should be the domain of any one state. I think that we should rotate the early primary between several more populous states like NY, PA, OH, CA, MI and FL -- along with going back to the idea of a more spread-out primary process. There's absolutely no reason that we need to have a Presidential nominee chosen by March, as evidenced by this year's campaign.